Paintings Depicting Historic Lutheran Divine Services
September 6th, 2009
I ordered a book from Germany titled Historische Bilder zum Evangelisch-Lutherischen Gottesdienst, which translated, is Historical Paintings of the Evangelical Lutheran Divine Service. It is by Helmut Schatz, published as a digital printing by Druckerei Hage GmbH, Kösching. It contains a large collection of images from throughout Germany and Denmark, one from the Czech Republic as well. When and where I find them on the Internet and am able to copy and paste them into my blog, I will.
Here is one from Denmark. It is found on the altar at the Torslunde Church, a church that dates back to the year 1,200. The painting dates from 1561. As you can see it is painted on the altar itself.
Here is a close up:
Categories: Art, Liturgy and Worship Trends
It’s interesting to look at the vestments and other clothing. For example, there are no stoles, but the celebrant is wearing a very fine chasuble. I read once that that was actually the norm among Lutherans. (The stole was considered a Roman vestment.) Some of the surplices lack sleeves, are those men deacons? And what is Luther wearing?
McCain response: The book I have depicts Lutheran clergy with and without stoles and with and without chausables. With cassock and surplice only, and some with clergy in cassock, surplice and stoles. It is off-base for anyone to assert that chausables were the “norm” throughout Lutheran Germany in the 17th century, but certainly they were widely used in various areas. But, universally, crucifixes were the norm. I have seen no example of a Lutheran altar with a corpus-free cross on it. So much for the myth that a corpus-free/bare cross is somehow “Lutheran.”
But, universally, crucifixes were the norm. I have seen no example of a Lutheran altar with a corpus-free cross on it. So much for the myth that a corpus-free/bare cross is somehow “Lutheran.”
That was my experience in my native Germany. In fact, it wasn’t until I came to the U.S. that I noticed Lutheran churches using a corpus-free cross. I’m guessing over the years due to the influence of American Protestant culture?
Christine
McCain: Bingo.
Do you have any idea why Luther’s head seems to be super-imposed onto the preacher in the close-up? If I zoom into the top picture, it’s a darker, straighter haired man in the pulpit (not Luther).
@Rev. Johann W Caauwe
I zoomed in as far as possible on the painting and don’t see any other person than Luther in the pulpit. Not sure what you are seeing ,but it is definitely Luther. The image was taken directly from the church’s own web site in Denmark.
That’s interesting what Pastor Caauwe mentioned, because here is a close-up of a similar shot (http://www.teol.uu.se/_pictures/avtalsbilder/kyrko3.jpg) and if you look closely at the top picture with the altar the preacher has darker hair like in the link I’ve provided. I’m not going to argue with what the church has on its own website, but that is an interesting difference.
@ptmccain
I thought it looked like the preacher in this image: I also thought it looked like Luther’s head was from a different source—it seems less grainy than the rest of the image. Perhaps I’m seeing things.
But thank you for posting the image. I was just wondering the other day where this one came from and hoped to find a higher-quality version..
@Johann Caauwe
Hmmm….something does look a tad fishy. The altar photo from the church itself does not seem to be Luther in the pulpit, and you are right the “close up” does look like somebody photo-shopped Luther’s head on to the pastor’s body. Odd that. I love a good mystery. WAIT: HOLD THE PHONE. The book I have has a good image of that painting. It is definitely not Luther’s head! Wonder who did that and why?
@Pr. Jeremiah Gumm
Jeremiah, thanks, I’m swapping this out for the image in the blog post. Interesting, no? Apparently somebody got a tad carried away with his/her zeal for Luther in the pulpit!
Good catch guys!
Translation (based on the Danish gloss of the Latin): “This painting was produced in the year of Our Lord 1561 at the advisement of Dr. John Jacob, [who is] priest of this church.”
I did a little checking and found this English abstract of a Danish resource on vestments. http://anglicanhistory.org/lutherania/severinsen.html The sleeveless surplice does not appear to have any special significance. It was merely an alternate form.
McCain response: Chris, this is an amazingly good essay. Good find!
What’s that baby wearing? He appears to be all swaddled up and secured with red masking tape. I like the matching hat.
) But I recall a painting of Melanchthon baptizing an infant who was completely unclothed. What was the norm in the 16th century?
Pastor Hinkle- The sleeveless surplice is called a “Saxon alb”. The “Dictionary of Liturgical Terms” by Philip H. Pfatteicher defines it as ” A white linen vestment in appearance like a SURPLICE without sleeves, worn over the black robe or TALAR at celebrations of the Holy Communion. It is a German Lutheran version of the sleeveless ROCHET”.