Music of our Hearts
Many, many thanks to Michael Krentz for his well-conceived article on teaching music of the church to our children [“Children, Music, and Worship: Strengthening the Connections,” May/June]. It has always been my lifelong passion to teach children the well-crafted and conceptually significant music literature that is an important part of our worship and that will be with us for our entire lives.

I especially appreciate Michael’s comments that children can learn the language and concepts of some of our more intricate hymnody. As I am responding to their questions, I have been the happy participant in many wonderful conversations about our faith that have resulted from my teaching children the words to such hymns. There is so much more that can be gained from taking apart the words of each verse and discussing them.

I love that a third grader can tell me that “What Child is This?” is not only a Christmas carol but [also] a Lenten carol, because it talks about the crucifixion. I nearly faint with delight that the first grader baptized this past Sunday considered “Lord, Keep Us Steadfast in Your Word” for her baptism hymn, especially for the words of the second verse, “Lord Jesus Christ, your power make known, for you are Lord of lords alone.” The only limits to what our children can learn are those that we set for them.

That so many adults these days are reluctant to work to understand words of our hymns has probably much more to do with what they were encouraged to learn as children than it has to do with the skills they have today. It isn’t too late for us as grown-ups, either, of course. But it breaks my heart when I see a proliferation of cutsie children’s songs that don’t have much meat, that aren’t particularly high-quality tunes, and that [the children] will likely never encounter as adults (because their own children will learn some other cutsie songs with an equally short shelf life).

I also really appreciated that Michael mentions that too many songs are pitched too low for children. One of the reasons many people fail to learn to sing, or hear the horrible and inappropriate caution that they probably cannot sing, is that they end up singing in their “low” register or “chest voice” and never learn how to access their “head voice.” And how many demonstration recordings do we hear with children’s choirs that sing flat or out of tune because they don’t access their head voice, as if “out of tune” singing is the only thing possible for children.

In our congregation, our elementary school students present a hymn to the congregation about three or four times each year. Sometimes it is a newer hymn, but more often it is a hymn that has stood the test of time. They have spent enough time learning the hymn to be able to sing the hymn by heart, or at least parts of it by heart, whenever we sing that hymn in worship. It isn’t uncommon to hear the children singing little snatches of hymns at coffee hour after a service.

We write our hymnody into our hearts, and those songs see us through our lives. How many stories we hear of Alzheimer’s patients who cannot recall their sons or daughters by name but can sing every word of some of the hymns that have been a part of their lives in worship, an activity in which their children and grandchildren can join as one voice with their parents and grandparents.

Thank you, Michael, for your wonderful article in a time when we are so unlikely to gain support for teaching the great art and literature that is ours in worship music. I hope many members of our church will have the ability to read and consider your words.

Nan Beth Walton
Seattle, Washington

I am grateful to Michael Krentz for [his] article ... Krentz wants us to “... remember the children when planning the assembly’s song.” He includes four markers “... of an assembly’s song if the leaders remember the children in their planning.” Before setting up those markers, we should consider the delicate work of reviewing texts (and tunes), and reviewing the language of texts. Why? Because for thousands of years the words of hymns have tended exclusively toward the masculine.

Krentz taught his third- and fourth-grade choir members to sing “Crown Him with Many Crowns.” He especially likes these words:
     Crown him the lord of years,
     The potentate of time,
     Creator of the rolling spheres
     Ineffably sublime.

In The New Century Hymnal (The Pilgrim Press, 1995, #301), this hymn, which evolved as a composite of the original text by Matthew Bridges, is written this way:
     Crown Christ who holds the years,
     embracing space and time,
     Creator of the rolling spheres,
     ineffably sublime;
     All hail, Redeemer, hail!
     For you have died for me;
     Your praise shall never, never fail
     throughout eternity.

Teaching children the assembly’s song is a vital part of worship. Teaching children songs that all people can sing appreciatively should not be ignored.

James R. Thomas
Bronx, New York

Cutting-Edge Music
I am always amused at the adulation and exaltation given to rock music by the modern church. During forty years as a church musician I have seen various types of “cutting-edge music” come and go.

The article by Ryan Houts (“Worship Intensified,” May/June) is yet one more tired example. I laughed when I saw the statement “What if the church went back to the way things used to be? Beautiful. Dark. Mysterious.” Oh, I thought, that could mean going back to incense, stained glass, chant. Singing hymns out of a hymnal with organ accompaniment and a choir. Well, that’s the way things used to be. What a concept!

Then it was on to glorify yet one more example of youthful “musicians” blasting the walls with ever-louder sounds in an attempt to prove how “cutting-edge” they are. I endured this forty years ago and it still doesn’t go away. It just gets louder.

Thankfully, I have been music director the past fifteen years at a church that went through all the worship nonsense of the past generation, got it out of its system, and has been providing traditional, organ-choir-hymnal worship to an increasing number of people of all ages who are looking for substance that survives.

Long after today’s “cutting-edge” stuff is replaced by more of the same, the hymns and music of the centuries will still be there, waiting for an amazed and incredulous group of young people to discover.

Donald Zimmerman
Colorado Springs, Colorado

Feeding Laity
In response to “Silence and Questions” by Harlan Norem [Letters, May/June], I would like to say that I agree with his major concerns. Namely, that we pastors in the Lutheran church have been very lax in updating the lay people relative to new issues and questions in theology. While we have been debating these issues on the seminary level for many years, very little of this trickles down to the pews. And, like Harlan says, lay people are asking the hard questions and deserve some honest kind of responses.

Why can’t we tell them the real history of the creeds and how they came to us? They didn’t just drop down from heaven in 325 A.D., but were the result of some political battles when the Emperor Constantine needed a united empire. We don’t dump the creeds, but accept them as a part of our church history and then move on to the 21st century where very different questions have surfaced. What do fourth-century bishops have to say about my faith and doubts today?

One of the problems for 21st-century American church people is biblical illiteracy. Many pew-sitters are stuck with a kindergarten theology and have been fed pablum so long that they are theologically starved. We need to treat lay people as hungry adults, not children, and dish out some real solid food (“for everyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is unskilled in the word of righteousness. But solid food is for the mature,” Hebrews 5:13-14).

So what are we afraid of? The truth will make you free. Let’s get out of the closet and invite the laity into our theological discussions.

M. Laurel Gray
El Cajon, California

I have been a pastor for 24 years and have served as an interim pastor for the past 10 years. I have taught Bible study in every congregation I have served, and have created my own studies on Christology, how the New Testament came to be, who is Jesus, and many other [topics]. In the Bible studies I have written I address all [the] latest questions of the Jesus Seminar and other historians and have always included the latest in modern scholarship in our discussions. One of my New Testament professors in seminary commented in class that there is nothing taught in a Lutheran seminary that cannot be taught in the parish. I have taken him at his word and have found everything he said to be true.

In my own seminary education, I remember coming in with a Sunday school faith and learning very quickly that it is not only acceptable to ask questions of our faith and the Bible, but it is healthy for growth in faith to do so.

Back when I began in ministry, I taught three classes of the Word and Witness Bible Study (LCA) and have yet to find a Bible study program that I like as well. I also remember one of the lay people in the first class saying, “In this Bible study you’ve destroyed my Sunday School faith. But what you have given me in place is a much stronger living faith in my living Lord.” I have never had a better reason for teaching Bible study, except perhaps for the growth and understanding of my own faith in the process.

Robert Kleinke
Duluth, Minnesota

Poignant Letter
In response to “Name Withheld upon Request” [Letters, May/June] I must respond:

It is sad to hear and read [the author’s] poignant letter as he/she expresses his/her feeling of anonymity (on the subject of the church and its policies for rostered leaders regarding sexuality).

Perhaps the church, the ELCA in particular, should have the approach used by the U.S. military, “don’t ask; don’t tell.” It is my opinion that it would be wisest to keep one’s private life indeed private. Furthermore, in my opinion, those men or women who persist in wanting their lifestyle and behaviors [to be] as the primary concern as they seek ordination or “marriage” should rather seek God’s Word as guide. God’s Word is very clear about homosexuality, and it behooves the church not to offend God, the Word, and the church by pushing [this] agenda.

If [some] must persist, and insist, why not approach those denominations that allow homosexuals to be ordained and/or provided a semblance of civil union or “marriage” (i.e., the Metropolitan Churches…). They would be accepted as they desire and pleased in every way. They can find membership in the ELCA, for sure, but not be rostered, and be accepted and loved as, we trust, we all are, thanks be to God.

Don Olson
San Diego, California

Faith and Baptism
Two letters by Todd Murken and John E. Peterson [Letters, “An Infant’s Faith,” Mar./ Apr. 2005] raise questions about Lutheran baptismal theology, and the question of whether Lutherans believe that Baptism works ex opere operato (“a work... which is supposed to impart grace simply by virtue of its having been properly performed, without reference to any faith...” Luther’s Works 35, 37 n85). Both writers seem to accept the idea of ex opere operato, and believe that the salvation of the infant baptized comes through the physical sacrament itself, something that could not be further from the truth of Lutheran theology.

In a 1522 sermon on the Ascension Day Gospel (Mark 16:14-20), Martin Luther wrote, “Baptism is no more than an external sign to remind us of the divine promise. If one is able to get Baptism, it is well... But if one were not able to get it, or one were denied it, he is nonetheless not damned provided that he believes the Gospel... For Baptism is useless without faith. It is like a letter to which seals are attached but in which nothing has been written. Therefore he who has the signs (which we call Sacraments) and not faith has seals only, seals attached to a letter without any writing” (WA 10-III, 142).

Here Luther clearly separates the action of baptism from the faith of the believer, and suggests that it is indeed possible to be physically baptized without being saved, and saved without being physically baptized.

Peterson wrote, “Most of us, I expect, agree that the sacraments do operate ex opere operato.” If they do (and I hope that he is wrong in his expectations), then they are not Lutheran. The Lutheran confessions consistently condemn the idea that the sacraments work ex opere operato. Typical of such condemnation is that of Philip Melanchthon in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, where he writes, “Here we condemn the entire crowd of scholastic doctors who teach that… the sacraments confer grace ex opera operato without a good disposition in those receiving them...” (Apology, Art. 13, sections 19-21). Lutheran opposition to the idea of ex opere operato can consistently be found throughout Luther’s writings, the Lutheran confessions, and the writings of most Lutheran theologians.

Unfortunately, there is today a great deal of sloppy baptismal theology in the ELCA. Much of this sloppy theology seems to be the sacramental equivalent of Bonhoeffer’s “cheap grace,” while other versions have wandered off into the realms of implicit or explicit universalism. We should hold the Sacrament of Baptism in great regard, but certainly not to the point that it is seen as conferring grace automatically, like some sort of hex that irrevocably transforms a person upon the completion of the act. Let’s leave that kind of “hocus pocus” for the “Harry Potter” books.

Mark Granquist
Northfield, Minnesota

Please Reply
In response to your letters on experiences of retired pastors offering their services, including the March/April 2005 letter by Alan Watt with reference to Melvin Kieschnick’s letter (Nov./Dec. 2004), there is another aspect of one reported experience which has not been touched on.

Three retired pastors offer their “services to the lead pastor, but three years later had still heard nothing from him.” The question of whether the lead pastor should accept the retired pastor’s offers or not, is nicely explored by the authors.

But we also need to consider that the retired pastors have not heard or gotten any kind of response from the lead pastor. In my opinion, anyone who offers their services should get the honor of a response of some kind, be they pastor or laity! Hopefully the lead pastor is secure enough and competent enough to phrase a response — even if it is to decline their help. No response to an offer to help equals hurt feelings, lots of possible misinterpretations, and potential ferment from those others who might know what’s happening. We of course add: it sets a bad example for relating to volunteers anywhere.

Similarly, I know of a pastor’s young adult child who did not move when the pastor/father moved on. The new pastor in due course visited and asked for help with a specific project in the parish which was accepted, along with the pastoral promise to get back with details. Then there was no response by the pastor even after being given a reminder. Did that young adult forgive? Yes. Forget? No.

Work with a pastor or lay volunteer, or not — at least reply to their offer! Also, make sure there is a good system in place to not “lose” any volunteers.

Gary Nickel
Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada

Parent-Driven
[Re: Karen Matthias-Long’s Facets column, “Growing in the Body,” May/June 2005]... We have a very successful after-school ministry which includes all generations. Our summer day camp program has the same theme. It is a sincere, honest attempt to do faithful ministry.

With all [this said], I still find [that] many youth still leave the church after confirmation if sports, Scouts, and other activities become the family priorities.

Our local ministerial association had a “community dialogue” series on “church school activities.” The school officials all told us that it is the parents’ wishes to place school and other activities over “church.” We do get a couple of youth who go to the area mega-churches. Again this is parent-driven.

David Coffin
Ada, Ohio

Baptism and Salvation
Several of us noticed in the new Lutheran Handbook from Augsburg Fortress the comment that baptism was a requirement for salvation (p. 72 at the bottom).

That’s new to me and to the others I spoke with. In the old Service Book and Hymnal, week after week we heard: “He who believeth and is baptized shall be saved. Grant this O Lord unto us all.” What Jesus said was,“ He that believes and is baptized shall be saved but he who does not believe shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

Does anyone else have a reaction to that?

Alan Williams
San Angelo, Texas

All letters to be published in Lutheran Partners must be signed. Address: Editor, Lutheran Partners, 8765 W. Higgins Road, Chicago, IL 60631-4101; e-mail, lpartmag@elca.org, Lutheran_Partners@ecunet.org, or LUTHERAN PARTNERS (if on Ecunet/ Lutherlink). Because we wish to publish as many letters as possible and at the same time maintain some control over the length of the letter section, letters should be 600 words or fewer in length. Shorter letters are preferred. Those selected for publication may be excerpted in the interest of space.