Editorial Note
Links to other media and further information regarding this topic can be found in the German version of this article.
1. The Philosophy of Music
The ethical implications of music emerge first of all out of the impossibility of making a sharp separation between ethics and aesthetics, an impossibility that has its origin primarily in the affects produced through music and other art forms and in their ethical consequences. The fact that, and the extent to which, music is ethical – or rather, must be reflected upon as such – comes clearly into focus when we inquire into pedagogical discourses surrounding music. The affect theory that underlies the ancient synthesis of ethics and aesthetics could lead to different judgments concerning the suitability of art for education. Already Plato 
discussed the production of art in his culture with a view toward its suitability for the development of virtue and, in this regard, went so far as to discard Homer . Insofar as he proposed that certain affects are not to be expelled but rather controlled,1Cf. Siering, Timm, Kirche, Musik und ästhetische Bildung. Kirchenmusikpädagogik am Beispiel kirchlichen Singens, Stuttgart 2022, 86. Aristotle framed the interplay between education and affect more positively than did Plato. The Aristotelian understanding ofaesthesis – that must always be interpreted ethically insofar as the dimension of poesis (i.e., one’s own artistic action) belongs to it – has been refined in music education from the post-war period up until today.2Cf. e.g. Roscher, Wolfgang, Polyästhetische Erziehung. Klänge, Texte, Bilder, Szenen. Theorien und Modelle zur pädagogischen Praxis, Köln 1976. It should be noted that the ancient’s understanding of aesthetics did not yet conceive of music in a modern sense but rather characterized it within the greater artistic whole of Greek Musiké.3Cf. Ehrenforth, Karl Heinrich, Geschichte der musikalischen Bildung. Eine Kultur-, Sozial- und Ideengeschichte in 40 Stationen. Von den antiken Hochkulturen bis zur Gegenwart, Mainz 2010, 41. For the history of music, the relation between affect and ethics in the baroque period is of particular significance. The reason for this is that the affects produced by music were understood not only as side-effects of musical practice but increasingly so as something to be induced explicitly through the use of specific musical stylistic-devices.4Cf. Eggebrecht, Hans Heinrich, Musik im Abendland. Prozesse und Stationen vom Mittelalter bis zur Gegenwart, München/Zürich 72008, 350.
In his own manner, Theodor W. Adorno outlines a pedagogical account of the relationship between ethos and aesthetics. Because of its unique external and hence sensually perceptible form, he grants the work of art the potential to engender aesthetic experiences. To act in the world presupposes that one has gained an interpretive access to it. Adorno shows how precisely this interpretation can occur through the mediation of music and art, especially concerning what could not be said otherwise. This interpretation is thereby able to make claims not only about itself but also about its context.5Cf. Vgl. Adorno, Theodor W., Minima Moralia. Reflexionen aus dem beschädigten Leben, Berlin 2003. With Adorno, music’s potential to effect moral change becomes the measure of what counts as good music. That Adorno – just like, among others, Wolfgang Roscher after him –concludes from this that classical new music (klassische Neue Musik) in particular is the suitable object of musical study is already a questionable premise in its own right. In view of the tasks of music education, it also makes us question the extent to which the ethical dimension is at all a suitable parameter for determining the quality of music.
Peter Rinderle has recently criticized the integration of ethics and aesthetics. Rinderle aptly observes that moral insights gained in the context of aesthetic experiences are not restricted to the latter. Whoever views empirical facts without looking through the lens of the work of art can come to similar insights. The most popular as well as impressive argument for a separatist view of music and ethics is the example of National Socialism’s most atrocious crimes, committed by individuals who were thoroughly educated within the humanist tradition, who made music, and who in certain cases even grew up with Church hymns.6Cf. Rinderle, Peter, Musik, Emotionen und Ethik, Freiburg/München 2011, 78ff.
2. Psychology of Music
Generally speaking, music – and singing in particular – has effects on the human psyche and body. Interest in these effects has grown in the past few decades to such an extent that the psychology of music has increasingly separated itself from systematic musicology (systematische Musikwissenschaft) as its own musicological subdiscipline.
In light of singing’s positive effects on the singer, theological reflections on spiritual and liturgical music primarily emphasize its pastoral dimensions.7Cf. e. g. Klessmann, Michael, Kirchenmusik als Seelsorge, in: Fermor, Gotthard/Schroeter-Wittke, Harald (Eds.), Kirchenmusik als religiöse Praxis. Praktisch-theologisches Handbuch zur Kirchenmusik, Leipzig 22006, 230–234. The sciences of music are, however, increasingly establishing medical relationships between singing and health. Already around the turn of the century, American researchers proved that choral singing leads to the release of immunoglobulin A and cortisol.8Cf. Beck, Robert J. et al., Choral Singing, Performance Perception, and Immune System Changes in Salivary Immunoglobulin A and Cortisol, in: Music Perception 18 (2000), 87–106. Communal singing therefore demonstrably supports the immune system. It has also been established that regular singing has positive effects for diseases of the lungs and the speech apparatus. Here again, what is decisive is that the singing is communal.9Cf. Lord, Victoria M. et al., Singing Classes for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Randomized Controlled Trial, in: BMC Pulmonary Medicine 12 (2012), 69. In addition to these particular positive effects on the singer’s health, it can be also be shown that singing, especially in community, has positive effects on overall well-being.10Cf. Kreutz, Gunter, Warum Singen glücklich macht, Gießen 32020. These examples illustrate that singing differs from speaking not only from the perspective of the science of communication but also in terms of its effects on the body.
Another significant insight of the musical sciences is that the diverse effects produced through music and singing can be misused. An eloquent example of this is found in the National Socialists’ battle songs. Not only did these songs glorify war on the battlefield, they also polemicized against particular ethnic groups and thereby contributed substantially to the holocaust.11Cf. Kreutz, Singen. Especially in post-war German society, the historical abyss created by National Socialism understandably led to reservations about communal singing that extended to the Church hymn.12Cf. Krieg, Gustav A., Kirchenmusik und Gesellschaft nach 1945, in: Bönig, Winfried (Ed.), Musik im Raum der Kirche. Fragen und Perspektiven. Ein ökumenisches Handbuch zur Kirchenmusik, Stuttgart 2007, 140–157.
The selection of suitable hymns continues to receive significant attention to this day. Not least, this is because of the alignment of music and state during the horror of National Socialism, something that occurred especially in Church services by virtue of the (seducing) effects of music and texts as well as the mutually reinforcing interplay of both in communal singing.
4. Church Hymn in Theological Tension
The relationship between text and music in the Church hymn is also interesting in the sense that, in their own hermeneutical contexts, both strive toward being a form of language. Although a song’s text is in reality verbal language embodied in a document, music is a form of communication that is not language in the stricter sense of the term.13Cf. Fuchs, Peter, Theorie als Lehrgedicht. Systemtheoretische Essays 1, ed. Marie-Christin Fuchs, Bielefeld 2004, 157f. This is due to music’s semiotic underdetermination [unterdeterminierte Semiotik] in comparison to the spoken word. That music is not a language does not, however, entail that it has nothing to say. Indeed, Luther’s positive evaluation of music is related to the fact that its formal nature exhibits figurative structures [figurale Strukturen] that openly invite reflection. Due to its less concrete determination, music offers other – at times easily accessible – more individual, or even less biased interpretations than the spoken word.14Cf. Schröer, Henning, Poiesis, Creatura, Charisma. Musik aus theologischer Perspektive, in: Bubmann, Peter (Ed.), Menschenfreundliche Musik. Politische, therapeutische und religiöse Aspekte des Musikerlebens, Gütersloh 1993, 21–34, 31f. Insofar as it brings with it a certain unpredictability, music’s semiotic underdetermination (semiotische Unterbestimmung) is the source of the greatest theological misgivings about the use of music not bound to texts. It is therefore not surprising that text-bound music – of which the church hymn is the example par excellence –enjoys the greatest trust in the liturgy and the Church before all other musical forms.
At this point it is worthwhile to consider the discourse itself. The reason for this is that the debate concerning which form of music is appropriate for the liturgy and teaching, since at least the Reformation, has been so controversial that the church hymn still today can demarcate denominational boundaries. For example, Luther’s high regard for music meant that he permitted not only a freer poetic license with the hymn’s text but also instrumental music in the liturgy. While for Luther this was seen as enriching for the liturgy, Calvin and Zwingli were skeptical, if not downright dismissive, toward music and singing in the liturgy.15Cf. Bertoglio, Chiara, Reforming Music. Music and the Religious Reformations of the Sixteenth Century, Berlin/Boston 2018, 202ff. The foundational argument for this skepticism invariably focuses on music’s power to encourage movement that can be interpreted as a disturbing –indeed even dangerous – distraction or as the work of the Holy Spirit.
The controversy continues today in a time in which the churches are under increasingly difficult decision-making pressures concerning the distribution of dwindling resources. This in particular indicates that the hymn is not a self-contained work of art but rather a living religious and cultural praxis that, in the long history of the formation of church ministries, has produced its own profession – namely, that of the cantor. For the most part, conflicts that arise when deciding for or against a hymn on the grounds of its suitability for particular liturgical contexts therefore have their basis not only in the material quality of the work itself but also in issues that pertain to the personal domain. This applies to the professional groups involved in decision making processes and, ultimately, also to the singers and non-singers in a church community. By virtue of this, the church hymn is a key indicator of the continual and context-dependent process of evaluation of what is considered right or wrong within the Church’s domain of action.16Cf. Siering, Timm, Inszenierungen des Heiligen. Liturgik als Kulturwissenschaft, Wiesbaden 2024.