LATINA LITANIA CORRECTA
1528-1529
THE GERMAN LITANY DEUDSCH LITANEY
1529
INTRODUCTION
The Litany of All Saints, the parent of both of Luther’s versions of the Litany, fell into disuse among the churches related to the Reformation Movement at the time of the Carlstadt liturgical reforms. These centered at Wittenberg and took place about 1520-1521. As the influence or example of Wittenberg was far-reaching, reforms effected there were likely to be instituted at other places.
The Litany of All Saints was not attacked as some other rites and
ceremonies were, because of unevangelical and superstitious character. On the other hand it was regarded highly by Luther, and valued as a form of prayer of great power and spiritual helpfulness. But this Litany had been connected with observances and ceremonies, of long, long standing, which in themselves were viewed with distaste and aversion. This was particularly true of the Processions, where superstition ran riot, and the almost endless repetition of prex and respond seemed to be nothing more than a lot of meaningless mumbling and plappern. When these Processions (Bittgange) and the other rites with which the Litany was connected or of which it was a part fell into disuse, the Litany disappeared quite as a matter of course, but not because there was any radical opposition to it in itself except for the lengthy invocation of saints.
There is no evidence bearing witness to the use of the Litany in the churches of the Reformation Movement from
1521 to 1529. Early in the latter year both the Litanis Correcta and the Deudsch Litaney appear fully established in the use of the Stadtpfarrkirche at Wittenberg. The probably is that both had been prepared by Luther during the latter part of 1528 and introduced into the worship of the Wittenberg church ‘during the late months Of the same year, the actual introduction antedating the appearance of the printed forms. At all events Luther writes his
close friend Hausmann on February 13, 1529, that they are singing the Litany in the church in Latin and in the vernacular. Just a month later Luther sent a printed copy of the Deudsch Litaney, printed with
accompanying musical notations, to Hausmann. There is strong probability that the Latina Litania Correcta was also issued in separate form this year, but the earliest print known is in Luther’s Enchiridion piarum
precationurn, issued in 1529.
In the light of Luther’s statements regarding the Litanyin sermons and writings of earlier years, it would be unfair to say that it was necessary to reawaken his interest in it. One doubts that he ever forgot it, or lost interest in it for any length of time. On the other hand, one cannot help but think that he was awaiting the opportune moment for its reintroduction into congregational use. That was what he thought it should be, the prayer of the congregation in the church, dissociated from Bittgang or any other rite.
Two things contributed to the reestablishment of the Litany as a congregational prayer form. Whether one or the other led the way is a question; probably the one being present, as a long-standing desire, used the other when it arose as a timely opportunity.
The one was Luther’s constant desire to foster congregational worship: to furnish all things needful to this end, that the common people might be able to participate intelligently and heartily and devoutly in the corporate
worship. His interest in these matters did not end with the publication of the Deutsche Messe in 1526, but continued unfailingly thereafter, showing itself in the writing of hymns and prayers, etc., the publication of hymn books and prayer book. The spiritual interests of the youth were as important to Luther as their elders.’ His activity in the sphere of worship always included their advancement in these holy, spiritual exercises as well.
With them well trained in these worship uses, not only would the result be to their benefit, but their elders through them. That the Litany lent itself to this objective, the way in which it was used very shortly (if not
immediately) after reestablishment is proof, and quite able evidence that Luther had been thinking of it in just this way.
The other is the timely opportunity. This was occasioned by the terrifying threat of the feared Turk. Some time during October of 1528 Luther began his pamphlet, Vom Kriege wider die Turken. In this Luther urges that the Christians be exhorted and taught to pray with great earnestness and in faith. And it would be better not to pray at all than to pray without faith.
Then he continues, “For this reason I want processions f318 to be spoken against, as they are a heathenish, vain, unprofitable use; they are more an ostentatious show and empty formality than a prayer. In the same fashion I speak against the saying of many Masses and the many invocations of the saints. But this might help somewhat, — if one would have the Litany sung or read in the churches, especially by the young folk; this might be done at Mass, or at Vespers, or after the sermon.” (W. 30, 2, p. 118).
According to the letter to Hausmann, of February 13, 1529 (mentioned above), Luther made his own advice effective in the Wittenberg church, Here the Deudsch Litaney was a Lord’s Day use, connected with Divine Worship (Mass), and the Litania Latina was a ferial use.
Luther provided the musical settings for both. Early (original) prints are with the words set to the music. The indication is for two choirs, singing the prex and respond antiphonally, the congregation joining with the second, responding, choir. Weekdays, the choirs were composed of boys, the responding choir being located in the body of the church in order to be more effective in aiding the congregation to learn the responds. Where these methods could not be carded out, the pastor read the prex and the choir and congregation, or congregation alone, sang or repeated the respond.
Luther’s desire was to have the re. introduction of the Litany as widespread as possible. His wish was accomplished very quickly. The Deudsch Litaney in particular appeared in many editions and forms. It was published alone; it was printed with the Small Catchism; it appeared in. the hymn books; it had its place in his prayer book. Kirchen Ordnungen, which shortly thereafter began to appear in every section of Germany, included it.
Here was the great congregational prayer, useful in many contingencies;
not only under the threat of the invading Turk, but in times of need, pestilence, famine, preceding great events, etc.
Notwithstanding the fact that the Deudsch Litaney seems to have been the first of the two versions to be published, our opinion is that the Latin version was the first prepared by Luther. The uses to which he had been accustomed and to which he clung were Latin. It would seem to be the more natural thing to make the probe, the first attempt, in that language when the model was Latin and his whole worship feel and tradition was embedded in a Latin liturgical atmosphere. Further, Luther speaks of his Latin version as the Latin Litany Corrected; his German version is simply The German Litany. Then, too, the Latin version is much fuller than the German. An excision of further material, a compression of the number of petitions, as in the German, would seem to evidence the fact that the German version resulted as a revision of the Latin after the Latin had been given a practical trial in service use. It is far more natural to prune and abbreviate than to enlarge, especially in liturgical forms. The German, no doubt, was the objective; but it was reached through the Latin. Witness the evidence by comparison, as shown in the comparative table appended to this introduction. With the two versions placed side by side, and compared with the original Litany of All Saints, one can follow the process fairly plainly. Besides there is other evidence that Luther was inclined to work in this way. This appears in his two Orders for Baptism, where the method is exactly this one. f319 Therefore, we accept the Latin version as the first, and this in turn as the model for the German.
Luther’s Latina Litania Correcta is very similar to the Litany of All Saints, in form, in order, and in contents. The marked divergences are in the complete omission of the invocation of all saints, the intercessions for the pope and for the departed. His petitions are more concise m expression, and he is much more spirit in the things for which he pleads to God. For example, he prays for faithful pastors; against sects; for those who err or are misled; against Satan; for faithful laborers in the Vineyard; for those distressed and affected; for the king and princes; for the emperor; for the civil council and for the congregation; for those in danger; for prospective mothers and infants; for children and the sick; for prisoners; for widows and orphan; for enemies and blasphemers; for the fruits of the earth. In this group of intercessions, Luther has done the largest amount of independent writing in his revision. For a complete survey of the omissions, variations, and insertions, the reader is referred to the appended table of comparisons.
Following the traditional custom of adding special prayers to the Litany, Luther completed both versions with a number of collects. These again are translations of Latin originals. f320
In the reform or “correction” of the ancient Litany Luther contributed a lasting gift to the worship life of the Church. The Litany, like his major Orders, were valued as models in every section of the Church of the Reformation; but while this or that section might depart from his Order of Worship, they all accepted the Litany, — Germany, Austria, Scandinavian countries, all perpetuated his versions; and it contributed to the reform of the Litany in England. Today it is preserved and used in the Kirchenbuch and in the Common Service Book. f321
Literature: — The translations have been made from the text in Weimar 30, Pt. 3, 29ff (German); 36ff (Latin).
See also — Jena 8:368 Walch 10:1758 Erlangen 56:360
On the Litany in general see:
Bingham and Cheetham’s, Dicty. Christian Antiquities, 2:999 Bona, Divin. psalmod, c 14, 4, 1
Calvor, Rituale, 2, c 16, 1
Thalhofer-Eisenhofer, Lehrbuch d. Lit., 2, 498ff.
On the Litany in general and Luther’s versions see: Kliefoth, Zur Gescht. d.
Litanei, (1861)
Liturg. Abhand. 5:301ff, 373ff, 398ff; 6:152ff, 225ff, 298ff; 8:66ff, 243, 369
Schoberlein, Schatz d. lit. Chor. und Gemeindegesangs, 1, 521; 725ff Rietschel, Lehr. d. Lit., 1, 200f, 294, 358ff, 431, 444, 505 534ff Realencyc. 3, 11, 524ff, 528ff.
Drews, Studien sur Geschichte des Gottesdiensts, etc. Beitrage su Luthers lit. Reformen, 1 and 2.
The comparative table has been taken from this study, but with this
addition: the Augsberg Breviary, a conventual use of this immediate period has been also collated.
For the Litany collects see Drews as above and
Althaus, Zur Einfuhrung in die Quellengeschichte der kirchlichen Kollekten etc. p. 12f.
It will also be interesting and profitable to compare the Litany of All Saints as now used by the Roman Church. For this see the Rituale Romanum, (Ratisbon) 91seqq.
PAUL ZELLER STRODACH