The Altar and its Vestments

The three liturgical stations in our Church, as accepted by all our writers upon this subject, are:—The Baptismal Font; The Pulpit and its co-ordinate, the Lectern; and The Altar. The place for the font is by almost universal usage fixed at the entrance to the chancel, on the floor of the approach from the nave. Here it will not intercept the view of the altar, yet it will be in line with it in the middle of the church; a place where it suggests that the only way of approach to the altar is by Baptism and faith.

The Pulpit is generally placed on the south side of the church where the chancel or choir joins the nave. Meurer says in his "Kirchbau," page 214: "The question whether the pulpit should be placed on the north or south side, in respect to which there has been no established usage, becomes for us simply a question of expediency; for the distinction between the women's and men's side of the nave, or between the Gospel and Epistle side, has for us no longer any significance. The south side might be preferred simply for this reason, because the preacher facing north, is at no time in danger of having the sun shine in his eyes." We would add to this that since the preacher will make most of his gestures with his right hand and thus unconsciously turn his right side to the audience, it always seemed to us that the south side was the more appropriate place for the pulpit. Since the custom of placing the organ on one side of the choir or chancel instead of in a loft over the west entrance is becoming quite common with us, and since the organ, when thus placed is generally on the north side we expect to see the pulpit maintain its old position on the south side of the church. It should be fixed as far out into the nave, i.e., as near to the people, as possible. Under no circumstances should it be combined with the altar, where it places the communion table beneath the preacher's feet; and care should be taken, especially in small churches, that it is not built so inordinately high as to compel the preacher to contract every muscle in his throat while looking down at his people who invariably go home with stiff necks after looking up at him during the sermon.

The Lectern is not commonly found in our German churches, where it is the general custom to read the lessons from the altar. There are a number of reasons to show that this custom is an objectionable one, and Lochner insists upon the adoption of the lectern, not only by urging the usage of the ancient Church, but by pointing to the use of the lectern in the Lutheran Church, as proved by the Leipsic Agende of 1681 and a description of an old Dresden church in 1717. He answers the objection that the necessity of moving from the altar to the lectern and back to the altar causes an awkward interruption, by pointing out that such interruption does not exist for the congregation which sings the "amen" after the collect while the pastor takes his place at the lectern and begins to sing the Credo after the reading of the Gospel. With us this objection also fails to apply, for the pastor approaches the lectern during the singing of the Amen and resumes his place at the altar during the singing of the "Praise be to Thee, O Christ," after the Gospel and before repeating the Creed. It should also not be overlooked that the reading of the lesson from the lectern saves the pastor the handling of what is very often a somewhat unwieldly (sic) Bible, which at times proves such a strain, that we have seen ministers lean against the altar, seemingly unable to support its awful weight. Besides, a lectern, where it is a fixture, decides for once and all where the layreader is to stand in case a service is held during the pastor's absence. The common form for this most useful article of church furniture is the eagle, the symbol of John the Evangelist, resting upon a pedestal, and its proper place is the north side of the chancel, opposite the pulpit. The Bible is to be placed on the lectern, but the place for the Book of Forms or "Agenda," is the altar. It is of this, easily the most prominent and important piece of church furniture, and of its vestments that we wish to speak. We have, however, deemed it necessary to mention font, pulpit, and lectern, not only because their place is determined by the position of the altar, but also because the hangings for pulpit and lectern must correspond in color and material to the season vestments of the altar.

The first visible accessory to worship of which we have any account was an altar. Gen. 8:20, and Gen. 12:7 ff. It's (sic) place is easily the most conspicuous in the entire church edifice, opposite the west entrance at the end of the center aisle in the choir or chancel, in other words, the recess or opse which corresponds to the coucha or testudo of the ancient basilica. This recess, in a Lutheran church, should never be built so deep as is the Anglican custom, where it is occupied by the vested choir as a sort of a minor order of the clergy, and very often separated from the nave by a rood screen, for in the Church of the Word the altar must be so placed as to enable every person in the congregation to see and hear every thing that is there done or said by the minister. For this reason it should also be sufficiently raised above the floor of the nave, so as to be readily seen by the whole congregation when standing for prayer. On the other hand it must not be too shallow, for it is the Lutheran custom to receive the sacrament inside of the choir or chancel, and not at a rail which separates chancel and nave, as is the custom in the Romish Church. This recess should have sufficient width and depth to provide plenty of room for all acts which are performed before the altar, such as Ordination, Confirmation, Marriage, etc. Nor is it according to the best usage to place the altar against the rear wall of the chancel, which is its usual position in the Anglican Church.

The Old Testament altars were, no doubt, square or oblong piles of stones. Our Church, though retaining this general form, builds its altars of wood or stone. The Reformed churches of this country use an ordinary table, and thus, strictly speaking, have no altar, but only a table placed on the floor below the pulpit platform where it is equally serviceable and convenient for any use to which pastor, deacons or committee on decorations may desire to put it. Indeed, they repudiate the very name and speak only of the "communion table." And yet, strange to say, the significance of this their communion table, so far as it has any, approaches to that of the Romish altar of sacrifice. For the Lord's Supper has with them, utterly lost its sacramental character. God therein gives them nothing; it is no real means of grace, but a mere memorial feast, where they show their faith in Christ and love to the brethren. They give and sacrifice, rather than receive from God. Just as a Romish priest at the altar claims to give and present to God "an unbloody sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead!" The moment you go away from the Lutheran Church, you go towards Rome.

The altar in the Lutheran Church does indeed speak to us of a sacrifice, but it is the one sacrifice made for our sins forever by the one man Christ Jesus. (Heb. 10:10-14) It is thus the "Table of our Lord," the place where He gives us Himself with all His benefits, His body and blood for the forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation. And thus we call the Lord's Supper, "the Sacrament of the Altar." Only secondarily does our Altar suggest to us that at this place, above all others, the church should, with uplifting of hands, offer to her Lord the sweet incense of the only acceptable New Testament Sacrifice, prayer, praise, and thanksgiving. It need hardly be pointed out that this conception of the altar is eminently Scriptural. First laying all stress on the words, "Take, eat, my Body, given for you; Take, drink, my Blood, shed for you, for the forgiveness of sins" it does not lose sight of the command: "This do in remembrance of me." Rome and Ultra-Protestantism both emphasize only "This do! This do!" and utterly forget everything that goes before. We, therefore, say again: the altar of a Romish church with its tabernacle and reliquary as well as the plain table of the Protestant sects differ radically both as to purpose and significance from the Altar of the Lutheran Church.

This truth must never be lost sight of in the ornamentation of altar and chancel. True as it is that the chancel, with altar, pulpit, and font, is the organic center of the whole church edifice and that here color and decoration must not be stinted, as the chancel gives character to the whole building, yet it is just here, especially in the ornamentation of the altar, that the canons of good taste and Lutheran usage are most often transgressed.

Lutheran usage permits and even favors the building of a reredos or screen upon the rear of the altar. The reredos must correspond with the general style of the church's architecture. The circular lines of the Romanesque style are out of place in a Gothic church. The reredos of the Anglican churches are as a rule, too low and squatty, probably because of their penchant for placing the altar against the rear chancel wall and their fondness for large East windows. In a Gothic church, we prefer a polygonal apse and side windows; if the rear wall is straight, use a rose window or some large trefoil design. Give the chancel plenty of light. To use dossal hangings instead of a reredos is rather an Anglican than a Lutheran usage. We do not favor them for they are seldom found in our churches, they submit to no artistic treatment, and, so far as we know, have no meaning.

All statuary and painting on the reredos must have distinctive reference to the redemptive work of Christ and to the Sacrament. To simply place any Biblical picture, regardless of its reference to the Sacrament behind the altar in a cheap gilt frame can hardly be called good taste. The ancient sacramental typology (Abel, Melchizedek, Abraham and Isaac, the brazen serpent, etc.), or symbolism (the Agnus Dei, the vine, a chalice, ears of wheat, etc.) can hardly be improved upon. If a picture is used, the Resurrection, the Ascension, the Institution of the Lord's Supper, or Christ's Agony in Gethsemane, are the favorite subjects. St. Mark's, Detroit, has the Lord's Supper in stained glass filling the whole rear wall of the chancel. The altar has no reredos and its top is on a level with the table of the pictured window. The general effect is very fine. A good subject for a window in the straight chancel wall of a larger Gothic church would be Christ's Coming to Judgment, in allusion to the "till He come" of I Cor. 11:26.—A slight and inconspicuous altar rail, always open in front of the altar, because of the spiritual priesthood of all believers, is permitted, not as a barrier to the altar, but as a rest and support to the kneeling communicants.

The Altar Vestments are the Altar hangings, the Altar cloth and the Chancel carpet. For a chancel carpet a quiet plain pattern should be selected and its color should harmonize with the general color scheme of the church decorations. Large, loud flower patterns must by all means be avoided. It is also not considered good taste to have crosses in the carpet pattern: it is not seemly to tread upon the cross. As a biblical reference for the use of a chancel carpet Liturgists give Exod. 3:5.

"The altar carpet of silk or other stuff, ought, according to the use of the Anglican Church, to cover the whole Altar, reaching to the ground," says Jebb, of the Altar hangings. This applies in our church, only where the altar is so poorly built, that it may not be shown without drapery. As a rule our altars are Gothic in design and the woodwork should not be hidden by the "altar carpet," which is either one piece of sufficient size to drop from the top of the altar to about one third of the distance to the floor, or a long piece, hanging the proper distance over each end of the altar, and provided with a strip to drape the front. The advantage of the latter plan of draping the altar is the prevention of unsightly folds at the corners, and the best taste requires that the altar be smoothly and plainly draped. Puffs and frills may have their place in a dressmaker's show-window; here they are out of place. Sometimes an Antipendium is used. It is a strip of cloth ornamented with some ecclesiastical design, about one-third the top width of the altar, dropped from the top center until it almost touches the floor. Only the best of materials should be used for such spreads; be it silk velvet, silk plush, or broadcloth. They are generally bordered with gilt or silk fringe and decorated with a short inscription or some appropriate emblem. The same applies to the hangings for pulpit and lectern.

To mark the different periods of the Church Year, our Church used the ancient liturgical colors for these spreads. They are five: Purple, White, Red, Green and Black. Purple is used for Advent and for Lent, beginning with Septuagesima Sunday. White is used for Christmas until Epiphany, for Easter, Purification, Annunciation and Visitation. Green is used for Epiphany until Septuagesima Sunday, and the whole Trinity Season. Red is used for Whit-Sunday and Trinity Sunday, for St John's day, the Apostle days and any festivals after Trinity Sunday. Black is used for Good Friday, days of humiliation and prayer, which with us is usually on Ash Wednesday, and for funerals. Thus Lochner; the Roman missal prescribes a somewhat different use. Lochner insists upon at least two colors as the minimum for our churches, Black and Green. If possible add Red, then White and Purple.

The white Altar cloth, which is spread over the season vestments, will be described in the article on the Communion Vessels and Altar Linen. Suffice it, therefore, to say again that it, with the season vestments, should at all times be upon the altar, whether the sacrament is to be administered or not. Bookmarks should be made in colors correspond with the season vestments. A description of altar ornaments, i.e., crucifix, lights, flowers and missal-stand, will form the subject of another article.

D. H. STEFFENS.

Lutheran Witness, Vol. XXI, No. 8 (April 10, 1902), p. 57-58.

The Ornaments of the Altar

A Lutheran D. D., brought up and educated for the Lutheran ministry in Pennsylvania, once described to the writer the feeling of horror he experienced at hearing a Lutheran professor at a German university tell his students that no Lutheran altar is completely furnished unless it have a crucifix and the two eucharistic lights. "Well," we asked, "how do you feel about it now?" "O," he replied, "I have learned something since that time." We would that some of the Lutherans of this country had learned with him! But how often are we told by people who consider themselves very good Lutherans that these things are "catholic." Which reminds us of a story.

An old pastor of one of our Michigan churches, was once approached by a member of his congregation, probably a Wuertemberger, who made the usual objection to these altar ornaments and to the intoning of versicles and collects by the pastor. "Why, Herr Pfarrar," he says, "that's 'catholic.'" "Indeed," says the pastor, "so everything a 'Catholic' does is of necessity 'catholic' and consequently wrong?" "To be sure," was the reply. "So if he eats his dinner with a fork, I must use a spoon to eat mine, or better still, do without eating?" "O," said the objector, "but I did not mean that." "Possibly, but that is your argument," replied the pastor. It is needless to say that the man, for want of any further arguments, kept his peace.

Nevertheless, no amount of explanation and instruction will ever silence this silly objection:—"Why, that is catholic." It is, however, provoking in the extreme to hear Lutherans, people who ought to know that neither the Reformer himself nor the church called after his name was ever narrow and bigotted (sic) enough to exclude all plastic and pictorial art from its houses of worship,—advance such puerile objections. "Why," says Luther, "whether I want to or not, when I hear of Christ, a human form hanging upon a cross, rises up in my heart; just as I see my natural face reflected when I look into water. Now, if it is not sinful for me to have Christ's picture in my heart, why should it be sinful to have it before my eyes? But, as we said above, no amount of explanation and instruction will ever silence that narrow, intolerant Carlstadtian spirit which still so profoundly influences most of the Protestant denominations of this country, and which, through these denominations, has influenced certain positions of our own Church to the detriment of their doctrine, worship, and spirit.

Suffice it therefore, to say with the above mentioned professor: We believe that no Lutheran altar is completely furnished unless it have a crucifix and the two eucharistic lights. Ask yourself: What should be my first thought upon entering a Christian church? Why, Christ and Him crucified. Certainly; and for this reason the Church, from the days of Constantine, if not earlier, was wont to place a crucifix upon the altar, where it must strike the eye of everyone who entered her doors, as a reminder of Him "who was delivered up for our offences and raised again for our justification." And therefore, a crucifix, not a plain cross, which some have adopted from the Anglicans in defiance of all Lutheran usage. No other symbol can ever become a substitute for this, the sign of completed redemption and perfect reconciliation, of the gospel of peace and its appropriation by faith. John 3:14, 15; 2 Cor. 5. Chiefly for this reason, among many others, this ornament should be carefully selected, provided it is not a part of the reredos carving, when it should be carved of the same kind of wood as the reredos. In size it should always be of a greater height than the candle-sticks, but proportioned to the general size of the altar. Its material should not be of fragile composition, such as plaster or bisque, but rather of wood, in its natural color, or of bronze, gold or silver-plated. The most handsome crucifix we ever saw was carved of ivory. Its place is the center of the altar, between the lights.

The use of altar lights is certainly not popish. The custom of having large lights, which were lit even in the daytime, during the most sacred parts of the service, was retained by the Church all over the world. For this we have the testimony of the Church Father, St. Jerome, who says: "In all the churches of the Orient, when the Gospel is to be read, candles are lighted, even though the sun be shining; not to lighten the darkness, but to make a sign of joy." This custom was probably derived from the sevenfold candle-stick in the Jewish Temple or from the synagogue of the Jews. When lighted during the celebration of the Lord's Supper, they are a reminder of the night when the Sacrament was instituted. They are also emblematical of Christ the Light of the world, John 1:6-9, 2 Cor. 4:6, and a symbol of joy, as Jerome says. For this reason they are, in some churches, lighted during the reading of the Gospel. Alt also sees in these altar lights a memorial of the times of persecution, when the Christians were compelled to assemble for worship in the darkness of night, in caves and catacombs. It can hardly be decided which were originally used, lamps or candles. In St. Chrysostom's time, however, candles were universally used, especially for the altar. We have seen four candle-sticks on a Lutheran altar in a Milwaukee church, but almost universal usage limits their number to two. They should be made of metal in some good design; cheap glass or porcelain candle-sticks are hardly in place on an altar. Nor could we ever admire the imitation candle gas-fixture affairs found in some of our city churches. We also confess to the American desire to have things handy, but where the candle-stick is a fixture it is almost impossible smoothly and properly to place the altar vestments and altar cloth. Moreover the general appearance of such imitation candle-sticks, especially when carelessly lighted, makes the deception too apparent.

Besides crucifix and lights it is also the Lutheran usage to place two vases with flowers upon the altar. By all means get good vases and use natural flowers. Happily, the glass covered abominations so common in our boyhood days are no longer seen. The artificial flowers furnished by dealers in church goods are not much better; for they very soon become faded and dusty. Good artificial flowers cost money, as every minister's wife knows. And we feel that natural flowers, even if furnished only on communion Sundays and taken to the sick or to some hospital after the close of the service, are much more beautiful and appropriate.

Lastly, we might mention the Missal-stand (the name is inappropriate, for we use no missals), the small board or desk upon which the Book of Forms is laid. Lochner calls it the "Altarpult."

It is a most useful piece of altar furniture. That it is ornamental, particularly in the form usually found in our German churches, we very much doubt. But it is easy enough to find an appropriate pattern for this altar desk or Agenda-stand, and any pastor, who has tried to read the communion service, stooping over a church book, lying flat on the altar, will appreciate this little article which enables him to see and read while standing upright and maintaining a position of some dignity and decorum while ministering before his people. We have not felt its need in our English churches where the want of a Book of Forms has compelled us to read the service from the hymnal, which the minister holds in his hand even during the consecration of the elements in the communion. As this want is about to be supplied, we will the more feel the need of this little stand or "Altarpult," so commonly found in our German churches.

D. H. STEFFENS.

D. H. Steffens, "The Ornaments of the Altar," Lutheran Witness, Vol. XXI, No. 9 (April 24, 1902), pp. 67-68.

Service Book and Hymnal Recordings: Setting Three

In 1945, a number of different American Lutheran synods came together to produce a new hymnal, one based upon the Common Service of 1888. After 13 years of labor, the Service Book and Hymnal was completed and published. It immediately became the hymnal of choice for the churches of the AELC, ALC, Augustana Synod, ELC, Finnish Suomi Synod, Lutheran Free Church, UELC, and ULCA (all of whom eventually ended up, through a series of mergers, in the ELCA). In order to help introduce the hymnal to these synods, a set of records was published, with recordings of each of the three settings of the Mass. The recordings for setting one and setting two have already been posted. The third setting, which is the focus of this post, uses the tunes of the ancient Missa Orbis Factor, as arranged by Ernest White. Due to space constraints, the third setting was printed separately from the hymnal and was consequently much less popular than the first two settings. Listen and enjoy (and many thanks to swedishlutheran for uploading these).

Invocation, Confession and Absolution, and Introit

Lenten Gloria Patri (not from the original records)

End of Introit (repeated), Kyrie, Gloria, Salutation, and Collect

Alleluia settings and Lenten Sentence (not from the original records)

Choral Alleluia and Verse, Holy Gospel, Nicene Creed (sung),
and Hymn ("Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty")

Entire Communion Service

As he did for SBH settings one and two, Stefan Gramenz put together a YouTube playlist for setting three. The playlist for setting three can be found here.

For the purpose of comparison, the following video contains the ordinary of the original, Latin Missa Orbis Factor:

Finally, if anyone knows where I might be able to get my hands on a set of the original LP recordings, I would be extremely grateful if you could leave a comment below. I would like at some point to make high quality digital copies of the complete recordings if I am able.

Service Book and Hymnal Recordings: Setting Two

In 1945, a number of different American Lutheran synods came together to produce a new hymnal, one based upon the Common Service of 1888. After 13 years of labor, the Service Book and Hymnal was completed and published. It immediately became the hymnal of choice for the churches of the AELC, ALC, Augustana Synod, ELC, Finnish Suomi Synod, Lutheran Free Church, UELC, and ULCA (all of whom eventually ended up, through a series of mergers, in the ELCA). In order to help introduce the hymnal to these synods, a set of records was published, with recordings of each of the three settings of the Mass. The recordings of the first setting have already been posted. The second setting, which is the focus of this post, was based on a setting of the Swedish Mass, as arranged by Regina Fryxell. It has been called "one of the high points in Lutheran liturgical music." Listen and enjoy (and many thanks to swedishlutheran for uploading these).

Kyrie, Gloria, Salutation, and Collect

Lenten Kyrie (not from the original records)

Alleluia (Prussian)

Alleluia (Missa de Angelis)

Holy Gospel, Nicene Creed (spoken)

Offertory (Create in me a clean heart, O God)

Communion Service, through Sanctus (Swedish)

Sanctus (German)

Agnus Dei (Braunschweig)

Pax Domini, Agnus Dei (Swedish)

Nunc Dimittis, Post-Communion Collect, Salutation, Benedicamus, Benediction

As he did for SBH setting one, Stefan Gramenz put together a YouTube playlist for setting two. The playlist for setting two can be found here.

Service Book and Hymnal Recordings: Setting One

In 1945, a number of different American Lutheran synods came together to produce a new hymnal, one based upon the Common Service of 1888. After 13 years of labor, the Service Book and Hymnal was completed and published. It immediately became the hymnal of choice for the churches of the AELC, ALC, Augustana Synod, ELC, Finnish Suomi Synod, Lutheran Free Church, UELC, and ULCA (all of whom eventually ended up, through a series of mergers, in the ELCA). In order to help introduce the hymnal to these synods, a set of records was published, with recordings of each of the three settings of the Mass. The first setting, which is the focus of this post, consists mostly of Anglican chant, with some plainsong and Reformation-era chants added in as well. This setting would have been fairly familiar to most of the people first using the hymnal, as it was similar to the settings used in most of the SBH's predecessor hymnals (it is also very similar to pages 5 and 15 in TLH). Listen and enjoy (and many thanks to swedishlutheran for uploading these).

Invocation, Confession, Introit

Kyrie

Gloria in Excelsis Deo, Salutation, Collect

(end of the Epistle), Alleluia, Gospel

Lenten Response (not from the original records)

Offertory (Create in me a clean heart, O God)

Entire Communion Service (including a glorious Nunc Dimittis)

Stefan Gramenz has helpfully put together YouTube playlists for each setting in the SBH. The playlist for setting one can be found here.

Fall 1938 Conference of Liturgical Society of St. James

The Fall Conference of the Liturgical Society of St. James met at St. Matthew's Lutheran Church, 415 W. 145th St., New York City, on Monday and Tuesday, November 14 and 15. Beginning with choral matins, conducted by the undersigned, the conference heard a "Manual for a Women's Altar Guild" presented in his usually interesting style by Rev. Carl F. Wiedmann, M. A., of Woodcliff, N.J. "The Slavic Liturgy" was the topic presented by the Re. Paul Slavik, who, besides giving the fascinating details of its structure, also chanted various parts in the unique tones still maintained in the Lutheran Church of Slovakia. "A Study of the Collect" was presented by Rev. Martin Steege of East Rutherford, N.J., who traced the origin of many of the collects still in use among us back to the sixth century. The afternoon session was concluded by singing the Gregorian chants for the Eucharist under the leadership of Rev. Carl Bergen, of Leonia, N.J., precentor of the society.

The sessions of Tuesday morning were begun with a celebration of Holy Communion. The children's choir of St. Matthew's Lutheran School led the congregation in singing the Gregorian chants. The beauty and simplicity of these chants can best be appreciated when one hears them sung by such a group of fresh children's voices. The undersigned then read a paper on "The Liturgy for the Sunday-school," in which the basic aims and the materials suitable for such a liturgy were presented. The sessions were brought to a close by a paper on "The Origin and Development of the Church-year," read by Mr. Adolf Wismar, c.r.m.

Brooklyn, N.Y.
Walter C. Daib

The Lutheran Witness, Vol. 57, no. 25 (December 13, 1938), p. 429.

St. Paul's Lutheran Church, Fort Wayne (An Eastern Lutheran Perspective)

DEAR BR. KURTZ:—I would respectfully beg leave to present, through the columns of the Observer, a few facts to its numerous readers relative to our church—its present policy and position. During my recent journey with my family from Pennsylvania to Illinois, I had occasion to pass through Fort Wayne, Indiana, where the institution of the hyper-orthodox Missourians is located. It so happened that we spent the Lord's day in that vicinity. On Sabbath morning, I made my way to the city with a view to seek out the English Lutheran church. On my arrival in town, the bells were already chiming, and the streets were lined with the church-going community. I inquired of a number of persons whom I met, and was variously directed—some pointed me to the German Lutheran church, others again, pointed me to the French Catholic church. After roaming the streets for about half an hour in fruitless attempts to find the English church, I concluded to go to the German church. And here allow me to give a brief statement of matters and things I there beheld. The edifice is a large and commodious building, with galleries, and was filled with worshippers in every nook and corner. The church is surmounted by a cross. The first thing that attracted my attention on entering, was the gilt crucifix with a gilt image of Christ suspended upon it, erected in front of the pulpit [Actually, on the altar before the reredos; in many Eastern Lutheran churches, the pulpit stood behind the altar—hence this mistake]; on either side was an angel, and in addition to this, a candlestick with a candle in each, resembling wax. The minister who officiated on the occasion was, as I learned afterwards, a theological student; (the regular pastor being absent) his habit consisted of a black gown with what might perhaps be termed a white cravat—after the Episcopal style. He introduced the exercises by turning and bowing to the image and offering up a short invocation; then turning round, he read the gospel of the day; turning again to the image and bowing before it, he offered up the first prayer; he then, while the congregation was singing, retired into a small apartment adjoining the altar and pulpit, (probably the confessional [but actually the sacristy].) In a short time he again appeared at the altar, read the epistle of the day, then again retreated into the aforementioned apartment whilst the congregation sung a few verses; he then ascended the pulpit and delivered a short harangue on religious intolerance. At the close of the discourse he offered up the Lord's prayer, during which some person near the door tolled the bell, and whilst the congregation again sung, he descended from the pulpit and disappeared in the closet, and at the close of the hymn, once more appeared before the crucifix and the image, with his back to the congregation in an attitude of prayer. On beholding these things, it occurred to me that I must after all have entered a Catholic church. I tried by some means to get a glance at the title page of their hymn book, and at last I succeeded in getting my eyes on the title on the back of one of the books, which convinced me beyond a doubt that it was indeed a Lutheran congregation, at least by profession.

And now, dear Doctor, what think you of such papal mummeries and idolatries? And what think you of the fact, that by general consent and our present policy, we recognize these idolators as an integral part of the Lutheran church? yes, brethren in the faith? Look for example at our Lutheran Almanac; there, their institution is enumerated with Lutheran institutions, and their ministers' names are registered in our clerical list.

"These things ought not so to be." I therefore would take the liberty to offer the following preamble and resolution, to wit:—

Whereas God saith, and our symbols teach "thou shalt have no other gods before me, thou shalt not make unto thee any graven imagine, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; thou shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them; and whereas, Paul teacheth, "What agreement hath the temple of God with Idols? Wherefore come out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing."—Therefore,

Resolved, That unless these Missourians repent of their sins and bring forth fruit meet for repentance, (i.e. destroy their idols,) we will no longer own them as brethren of that faith once delivered to the saints....

E. FAIR.
Lena, Ills., Jan. 15, 1857.

From the Lutheran Observer, February 13, 1857, p. 1, col. 6-7. The foregoing was also reprinted in the Fort Wayne Weekly Times, April 23, 1857, p. 2, col. 5, under the title "Sihlerites Read!" and with the following introduction: "The present easy affiliation between the Sihlerites  under office seeker Piepenbrink, and the papist may be seen in the following description of the idolatrous mummeries practised at the Dutch Lutheran church in this city under priest Sihler." N.b. Wilhelm Sihler was the pastor of St. Paul's German Ev. Lutheran Church, the church discussed in this article.

The Missouri Synod Not Liturgical?

In the mid-1800s, the Missouri and Buffalo Synods were considered offensively liturgical by their Eastern Lutheran counterparts, with accusations of "Romanism" regularly thrown their way, but as the General Synod began to recover more aspects of the traditional Mass (ultimately resulting in the publication of the Common Service), those perceptions began to change, as can be seen from the following quote:

"Many of our good people have the erroneous idea that liturgik and symbolik are necessarily concomitant [this perception still lingers today]. Facts disprove that assumption [as, again, they still do today]. Not a few of our General Synod men who are not suspected of strong confessional leanings are still ardent supporters of the liturgy, and the Missourians, who are distinguished for their symbolism, have little or no liturgy as we understand the word. Their altar service is more simple than that of most of our own unliturgical churches."

Nevertheless, the Missouri Synod still persisted in retaining certain liturgical aspects which were uncommon in the General Synod. These include the use of crucifixes, candles, statues, and the black clerical gown.

"The use of the clerical gown has not become general [in the General Synod], and the most of those [General Synod] churches in which it is worn by the minister, introduced it with their origin. There are very few indeed which have adopted it as a new element, after they had been in existence for some years without it. It is an innovation which few would sanction, and it has never been considered of sufficient importance to awaken much interest in the church."

Both of the above quotes are from John G. Morris, Fifty Years in the Lutheran Ministry (Baltimore, 1878), 351).

Christmas in Fort Wayne

"On the eve of the three great holidays of the Christian year, Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, there was a beautiful custom at St. Paul's to "ring in" these festivals. St. Paul's had three noble bells cast for the congregation. All three bells were run together, three times; and all three bells once every Saturday evening, to ring in the Sunday. . .

"The most notable and most frequented service at St. Paul's during the entire church-year was, and still is, "die Christmette" (Christmas matins) at six o'clock in the morning of the birthday of the Christ-child, the singing largely done by  the children specially trained in classes; and at the end of that unique service the teachers were remembered with Christmas presents."[1]

Old St. Paul's German Evangelical Lutheran Church, Fort Wayne, IN
Image courtesy of the Allen County Public Library.

“In one particular matter there was at that time [1860s-1870s] a strong difference between Fort Wayne and St. Louis, I mean in the Christmette, held at 6 A. M. on Christmas morning. In Fort Wayne it was the most crowded service of the year, in which young and old most eagerly shared, in which “Vom Himmel hoch, da komm’ ich her,” “Lobt Gott, ihr Christen allzugleich,” and “Gelobet seist du, Jesu Christ,” were sung with a rapture beyond words, in which the manger of Bethlehem was extolled especially by children’s concerted voices, in which the entire church was festooned with fragrant garlands of evergreen, and lighted up with every contrivance of festal illumination. In St. Louis, in those days, small and often shivering assemblies were generally content to listen to some one of us students.”[2]

N.b. The background image on this blog is a picture of Christmas at the present St. Paul's church, taken in 1907.

---

[1] Ernest G. Sihler, From Maumee to Thames and Tiber (New York: New York University Press, 1930), 23f.

[2] E. G. Sihler, “College and Seminary Life in the Olden Days,” in Ebenezer: Reviews of the Work of the Missouri Synod during Three Quarters of a Century, ed. W. H. T. Dau (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1922), 260.

Lutherans Make Lousy Revivalists

Based on the following anecdotes, it would seem that some 19th century Lutherans were just as poor at mimicking the revivalistic methods of their Methodist neighbors as many 21st century Lutherans are at mimicking the "Evangelical style" of today's big non-denominational churches. Instead, the result is a muddled mess that is neither Lutheran, nor Methodist, nor Evangelical, nor anything else.

"One of our ultra revival men, after having preached some time in his new charge, said to the people, 'You sit here like stupid blocks and say nothing. I know not whether I preach good sermons or indifferent ones. Where I came from I could always tell this, for whenever I said anything that pleased the people, or that was particularly good, a number of persons would say, "Amen." This would encourage me, and I could preach better. But here I never get any such encouragement.' He then began his sermon, and was soon in full swing. He waxed louder and louder, and eloquence was at its height, when he vociferated, 'We are all cold and dead. We all, minister and people, need a revival. Your sons and your daughters are on the road to hell.' 'Amen,' shouted out one of the audience. The preacher suddenly stopped, gave him one look, and then scolded the poor fellow more severely for saying 'Amen,' than he had some time before for not saying it. The old fellow muttered, as he came out [of the] church, 'He may say amen himself next time.'—D. H. B."

Quoted from John G. Morris, Fifty Years in the Lutheran Ministry (Baltimore: 1878), pages 555-556.

"An old-fashioned minister found his young people attending a Methodist revival, and some leaving him. Upon this, he made an appointment in the following language: 'To-morrow evening we will hold a revival in this house.' The evening came, and the house was crowded. A young man preached the sermon. At the end of the sermon, the old pastor arose and said, Now let all the young gentlemen, who wish to be prayed for, come forward and kneel around the altar.' Some dozens of young men obeyed the invitation, and the old man kneeled down and prayed, not forgetting 'God's ancient people, the Jews,' in the course of his supplications. He then arose and said, 'The young gentlemen will now go to their seats, and the young ladies will surround the altar.' Some scores of young ladies obeyed the summons, and the good old man went through the same long, tedious prayer, not forgetting the 'ancient people.' He then arose, remanded the young ladies to their seats, and appointed a revival for next evening, and dismissed the congregation. The next evening came, but all the young men and young ladies were at the Methodist church, and remained there.—D. H. B."

Ibid., pages 556-557

This second story is illustrative, to my mind, of the problem facing many Lutheran congregations today which try to ape the worship styles of large, non-sacramental churches – the Lutherans are simply not as good at those styles of worship as their non-Lutheran neighbors. The end result? They lose the very people they were trying to gain. Not only that, but they lose the rest as well. Note that at the beginning of this account, only some of the young people were leaving; by the end, all the young people had left. This is to be expected. If the Lutherans are merely offering a poor copy of what another church is doing, why bother? There is nothing distinctly Lutheran about it, and the services are poorly done to boot. The application today can surely not be lost on anyone who is a member of the LCMS or WELS, or indeed any traditional Christian denomination, and who has experienced varied attempts at "contemporary worship."

The Liturgical Society of Saint James

"But who is this clothed in a white linen garment, — the alb, if we mistake not, — preceded by a crucifer vested in amice and lab and followed by a thurifer, with a cloud of incense hovering over the group as they chant a tune in Gregorian plain-song?

"And who are those vested clerics at the altar who hold the book for another person in ecclesiastical gown while he chants the Gospel for the day? Who are these young men in tight-sleeved vestments who move a book from one sided of the altar to the other, who swing a censer against the clergyman, against his assistants, and finally against the congregation, while incense curls to the rafters above?

A beautiful Easter, 2013, at Redeemer Lutheran Church, Fort Wayne, IN

"What you are viewing is an illustration of the law of action and reaction. Again, what you are viewing is an illustration of the Lutheran principle that church ceremonies are to be classified as adiaphora. We are not accustomed to have more than one minister officiate at the consecration of the elements in the Eucharist. We are not accustomed to have the book of forms, or liturgy, moved from one part of the altar to another during the liturgical service. Making the sign of the cross has long been limited to the ritual of Baptism and Communion and is then only performed on another and not upon oneself. Similarly, kneeling and bowing has been limited to Holy Communion, while in the celebrating of full eucharistic services these genuflections are quite numerous.

"We see in this exuberance of ritual, now advocated in some quarters, a perfectly natural reaction to the bare, jejune, and unliturgical service found in so many of our churches. Instead of practically no liturgy at all we are asked to recover every element that has passed out of use, whether for good reasons or not, in the Lutheran Church.

"The Liturgical Society of St. James, while assuming no responsibility for the liturgical views or practises [sic] of individual members, does announce the purpose of fostering a revival of liturgy in our Church. Among its objects are the following: 'to preserve and to restore the traditional liturgy, rites, and ceremonials; to devote ourselves to the study and use of the Gregorian plain-chant; to restore to our Lutheran Church the consciousness of her unbroken tradition and her ecumenical and catholic tradition and ministry; to get one parish in every large Lutheran city in which the liturgical life may be fostered; to foster Christian day-schools in which the liturgy may be learned as well as the Gregorian chant and the children accustom themselves to certain devotional hours.'

"Now, if we weigh the merits of either tendency, that towards making the service bare of traditional liturgical elements and that of embellishing it with a colorful ritual, the latter is certainly more in harmony with original Lutheran tradition. The Church of the Reformation, however, did not attach much importance to the 'laudable practises' [sic] which were carried on into the Lutheran Church as a historical endowment. The Reformers treated them lightly. The elevation of ritual to a level equal to that which the sermon has in worship runs counter to Lutheran traditions. The liturgical part of the service, even the Eucharist, must remain subordinate to the sermon. And there are things liturgy cannot do. Liturgy will not rouse a dormant conscience; will not create a consciousness of sin which makes the heart eager for the consolation of the Gospel; will not instruct and in the best sense of the word edify, that is, build up the inner man with ever new additions of spiritual knowledge. Liturgics does not make plain the Word, does not lead into a better knowledge of Christian doctrine. Those who join in the liturgy — and I say, let it be ample, ornate, beautiful — have tasted the heavenly food, have been transformed by it, and praise God for His mercies. But the ministry of the Word alone will keep them sound in spirit and loyal to the truth, so that also their worshiping will be done 'in spirit and in truth.' In the Reformed churches, as already noted, the trend towards liturgy has not been altogether wholesome. In it not an aid to spiritual edification, but a substitute for it, the appeal of esthetics [sic] replacing the lost appeal of the Gospel, has been found. There is more and more of the form of worship and less and less of the contrite spirit eager for light and strength. The Lutheran Church should heed the lesson of this development. Ours in indeed a liturgical Church. Let our services be restored to uniformity, with none of the traditional elements of the Common Service omitted. Let those who desire that sort of thing indulge their liking for vestments, candles, and incense. But let nothing be done or implied that will mean a departure of the congregation from the Lutheran conception of the Sacrament and of the ministerial office."

The above quote is the conclusion to Theodore Graebner's essay, "Our Liturgical Chaos", which can be found in his book, The Problem of Lutheran Union and Other Essays (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1935), p. 164-166.

Crosses, Images, and Candles in Lutheran Churches

The following article was taken from the Lutheran Standard, an Ohio Synod newspaper begun in 1842. The first two paragraphs, in turn, were copied from the Lutheran Observer, a newspaper of the General Synod. It was written by a Lutheran who travelled through Detroit sometime during July of 1848.

"'The [St. Matthew's] Lutheran Church [in Detroit] is not as large as some others, yet it is distracted. The present preacher [the Rev. Johann Friedrich Winkler, of the "Old Lutheran" Buffalo Synod] went there and preached for the Lutherans, and they hired him. They prospered well. A good looking building was erected; but as soon as the edifice was completed, with the constitution and articles made according to his desire, and all things arranged for his purpose, he introduced in the church the use of the—cross, burning candles, and images. The members were not ready for such a debasing step. They were not prepared to return to the bosom of that church from which their immoral leader had long since taken them. They were unwilling to yield to his Catholic measures. To terrify them, he threatened them. Then assuming a dogmatic attitude, he tries to compel them. They revolted, and now they are in a most unfortunate situation. They would be Lutherans, but they cannot comply with such unholy requisitions. The German Methodists have established a missionary station there.—Those pious ones see the peace and harmony that reign among them, and many of them will undoubtedly ere long go to the embrace of another church, unless something is done for them.

The altar at Historic Trinity Lutheran Church, Detroit, MI.
One can only imagine the horror the author of this article would have expressed at this arrangement.

"'This, unfortunately for them, is also the condition of the Lutheran churches at Ann Arbor and Monroe. All have their crosses, candles, and images; and the good people of those places consider them as no better than the poor devotees of the Beast. If now at this critical situation of our church at Detroit, &c., some one with a devoted and lovely missionary spirit would go there, and contend like his Master for right over wrong, truth over error, I have no doubt but he, in time, and perhaps in a short time, would be able to win the hearts of these Lutherans, establish and build up a good evangelical society which God would bless, and which would be an ornament to our church in the "City of the Straits."' [This being a pretty way of making sheep-stealing between Lutherans look good.]

"We hope the account given in the above extract, will prove to be unfounded, and gladly will we publish the correction. If true, however, it is another humiliating evidence of the weakness of man, and his proneness to fly off to extremes. If, on the one hand, we have no sympathy with those who profess to 'get religion,' by kneeling at a 'mourner's bench,' on the other hand we are equally disgusted with the Popish superstition exhibited by bowing to crosses and images, and burning candles on the altar in the day time. The Lutheran Church in this country has always been noted for the majestic simplicity of her worship, and we hope it will never be laid aside, either for modern 'new measures' on the one hand, or for mummeries that date back to the dark ages on the other."
Quoted from The Lutheran Standard, vol. 6, no. 15 (September 13, 1848), p. 2, col. 5.