Template talk:Lutheran hymns

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


I am not quite sure about the scope of this article navbox. Sometimes I am not sure if an author is Lutheran, or is it enough to have ended in a Lutheran hymnal? Somtimes I am not sure it's a hymn, such as "Es ist genug", which never made it to a hymnal afaik, but was used as a Bach chorale. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Also Zahn 7173: Zahn gives a few variants of the melody from different hymnals and composers. --Francis Schonken (talk) 08:24, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Re. "... this article" – Well, it is not an article: it is a navbox. --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Re. scope: a hymn in this navbox needs...
    • ... to have a separate Wikipedia article (no navboxes on redirects: redirects can be added to Category:Lutheran hymns though)
    • ... to be "Lutheran", which I understand as deeply embedded in Lutheran practice, and "a hymn", i.e.:
      • Preferably originated in Lutheranism, or at least to a larger extent adopted in Lutheranism than in any other tradition
      • Preferably in vernacular (which would be mostly German), although a few macaronic ones may be eligible too; most Latin hymns (several of them were adopted in Lutheranism) would be largely excluded
      • Preferably formally a hymn, i.e. metrical and/or with a melody listed by Zahn (would exclude Meine Seele erhebt den Herren)
      • As the bulk of Lutheran hymn production had ceased by the end of the 17th century very few of those composed at a later date would be eligible (BWV 505 might be an exception, if it ever gets a separate article)
      • Demonstrably adopted in Lutheran church practice (doesn't need to be EG or a recent hymnal: may e.g. have been widely adopted in 17th-century hymnals, and then forgotten)
    Please let us know whether you think this workable criteria: they probably can be fine-tuned. Individual borderline cases (some Christmas hymns as well adopted inside and outside of Lutheranism come to mind) can be discussed here or at the article's talk page whether they should be included in this navbox or not. I'm a bit weary the navbox may become unwieldy in the long run (there are over 160 hymns listed currently in the Lutheran hymns category... if they would all get separate articles other solutions may be necessary): thus I would exclude borderline cases mostly, and/or make the selection criteria still more exclusive. --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
The criteria are fine with me, but see below, what with those which don't fit? - When I wrote "hymnal" above, I was sloppy and didn't specify "to be sung by a congregation", which the early collections were not, and I doubt that the typical Leipzig church-goer would carry the Neu Leipziger Gesangbuch. But I may be wrong? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:28, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
The Neu Leipziger Gesangbuch marks a few (mostly monodic) songs/hymns as "choraliter" (as opposed to "figuraliter" being implied for most of the others): choraliter implying, as far as I understand, to be sung by the congregation. The next edition of the Leipziger Gesangbuch (1693) only contained hymn texts (without music) and had a compacter format – by then practice was changing: "Cantional" type of hymnals (of which the 1682 Neu Leipziger Gesangbuch had been one of the last prominent examples) had grown out of fashion, and the congregation sung all of the hymn tunes (as monodic melodies) with an instrumental accompaniment realising the harmony (the Figuralmusik was less often printed, and if so, e.g. cantata cycles by Telemann, not in hymnals). Also Schemellis Gesangbuch (1736) adopted the "choraliter only" format: less than 10% of the hymns had music, and those that had only as a monodic singing tune with a harmonic instrumental accompaniment (written down as thorough bass in this instance). --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:19, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

The others?[edit]

What should we do with the other hymns, Catholic, Ecumenical, Reformed, some falling in more than one category which we also don't (yet) have? I sang "Lobe den Herren" last Sunday in a Catholic church, - some "Lutheran" are sung there quite frequently. The mark "ö" in the hymnals, Protestant and Catholic, marks common use for both. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:16, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, but what about one both Protestant and Catholic, such as Lobe den Herren, - how can ecumnism show? - Btw, I'd say {{Catholic hymns}}, corresponding to Catholic Church. "Roman" looks almost misleading for the many German hymns ;) - For Catholic, we face more than for Protestant that the traditional singing was not rhymed and metered, but still hymns, at least in the first meaning "songs of praise". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:41, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
I have few opinions on which of these would be feasible or not. So either be bold and start those you think most likely to succeed, or take this discussion to a more general platform (e.g. a suitable project talk page): whatever is not about {{Lutheran hymns}} and its limits should probably better be discussed elsewhere. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:02, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Yes, later perhaps, busy. I was just looking for a place for "Es ist ein Ros entsprungen" which still is in the cat Lutheran hymns, and rightly so, because it's in current use, and beloved, in Lutheran/Protestant services, in a slightly different wording from the original. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:19, 28 November 2017 (UTC)


Do we need all the quotation marks? I understand that we need them in prose, to see what's a hymn name because it looks like prose, but why in this navbox where it's clear? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:10, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I'd say they are not needed, if nobody opposes they can be removed as far as I'm concerned (for comparison, in {{Bach spurious}} they were needed while containing as well short vocal works as cantatas). --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:55, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Let's wait a week perhaps. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:21, 28 November 2017 (UTC)