Well, Bach is back. And he's facing Richard Hooker in today's Saintly Sixteen matchup. Where but Lent Madness will you find such deliciously absurd pairings?
Yesterday, Bertha of Kent trounced Edmund 82% to 18% to advance to the Elate Eight.
Also yesterday, Tim and Scott released another rousing episode of Monday Madness. You've surely already seen it, but you can watch it here.
And finally, here's your occasional reminder that you can always visit the Brackets tab to find the write-ups from earlier rounds and refresh your voting memory. Just scroll down and right underneath the updated bracket, you'll find links to all the earlier matchups.
Time to vote!
Johann Sebastian Bach
In his novel Diary of a Bad Year, J.M Coetzee writes: “The best proof we have that life is good, and therefore that there may perhaps be a God after all, who has our welfare at heart, is that to each of us, on the day we are born, comes the music of Johann Sebastian Bach. It comes as a gift, unearned, unmerited, for free.”
People love Bach. Mention his name, and some music lovers close their eyes or sigh with pleasure. The Princesse de Polignac, who presided over an influential musical salon in 1920’s Paris, wrote that a Bach chorale “reconstitutes the past, and proves to us that we have a reason for living on this rock: to live in the beautiful kingdom of sounds.” Many have found their life’s inspiration – even obsession! – in Bach’s work, but those unfamiliar with him may find themselves asking…what’s the big deal?
Bach’s catalog was not merely prolific or virtuosic, but strikingly bold. Take the opening of his St John Passion: immediately you’re confronted with a sonic churn; swirling violins and piercing oboes and surprising dissonance. As the music intensifies, the chorus slices through the wall of sound – “HERR!” Bach chose to begin with the first verse of Psalm 8, “Lord, our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth!” Arias and recitatives focus on smaller details of the Passion narrative; Christ’s fragile body, the crowd’s powerful anger, the bitterness of tears. But Bach wanted to capture the cosmic scope of John’s Gospel; Divinity stretched out over the chaos and terror of Golgotha like bright sunlight piercing through darkening storm clouds. Music historian and New Yorker writer Alex Ross reports that the congregation at the Nikolaikirche in Leipzig did not seem to appreciate his theological vision (too quirky!) Bach removed “Her, unser Herrscher" from the score after the work’s premiere, adding it back in only near the end of his life.
Bach was a jumble of contradictions and surprises. While other musicians traveled the continent, Bach never ventured farther than 200 miles from his hometown. He was a devoted family man and famously prickly and difficult. He picked liturgical fights and clashed repeatedly with his superiors. He was also a devoted teacher, and not just of music; in his role as Cantor at the Thomasschule, Bach was responsible for teaching Catechism. In his well-worn and heavily annotated study bible, he made extensive notes and markings in the passages that dealt with vocation, including this one: “As far as your person is concerned, you must not get angry with anyone...But, where your vocation requires it, there you must get angry.”
Conductor and Bach biographer John Eliot Gardiner writes that “Bach the musician is an unfathomable genius; Bach the man is all too obviously flawed, disappointingly ordinary and in many ways still invisible to us.” Flawed, ordinary, and faithful–Bach makes an excellent Lenten companion. Ross writes that “Bach does not console; he commiserates.” “Herr, unser Herrscher” concludes with just that spirit of companionship: Show us through your passion, that you the true son of God, at all times, even in the most lowly state, are glorified.
Richard Hooker
Richard Hooker, the theologian who established the Anglican approach to governance, doctrine, and theology, lived in England in the late 16th century. He is best known for the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Polity—which he planned to be an 8 volume work, but died after completing only 5 volumes.
He wrote the books as his contribution to what is known as the Admonition Controversy. Two Puritans, in 1572, had printed a pamphlet which admonished Elizabeth I to “restore the purity of New Testament worship within the realm.’ Clerics of various stripes responded with their own pamphlets, sermons, and books, in the Renaissance version of an extremely slow Twitter war, and Hooker decided to join the fray with 8 entire books.
He is described by his biographer (Izack Walton) as being an old soul: “His Complexion (if we may guess by him at the age of Forty) was Sanguine, with a mixture of Choler; and yet his Motion was slow even in his Youth, and so was his Speech, never expressing an Earnestness in either of them, but an humble Gravity suitable to the Aged.”
Hooker’s benefactor while in London was the family of John Churchman, the owner of the house where he lived. According to Walton, Hooker arrived in London the evening before his first Sunday of preaching, sniffling and sneezing, bedraggled and soaked to the skin, having walked for two days in the rain. Only the kind ministrations of Mrs. Churchman and her most excellent soup render him able to preach his first dazzling sermon.
That first sermon that Richard Hooker gave at the Temple in London was one where he argued strenuously that, if God saved us entirely through grace, and not our own merit or worthiness, then should not God also save Roman Catholics too, if God so desired? “Surely I must confess, that if it be an Error to think that God may be merciful to save men even when they err; my greatest comfort is my error: were it not for the love I bear to this error: I would never wish to speak or to live.”
Scholars have wondered why Hooker, after his success as Master of the Temple and with the early volumes of Lawes, did not seek an episcopate, but it seems that Richard loved the quiet life of reading and study more than he did the glare of the spotlight. Several times, he wrote his bishop asking for a quieter placement, where he could study as he did in college. “I am weary of the noise and oppositions of this place; and indeed, God and Nature did not intend me for Contentions, but for Study and quietness.”
He died peacefully at his vicarage at Borne, in 1600.
Richard Hooker by Alfred Drury, R.A. (1889-1926). 19076.
89 comments on “Johann Sebastian Bach v. Richard Hooker”
Despite having been married to a man named John Churchman for over fifty years, as a musician I have to vote for JSB who wins the golden halo in my bracket. Hapot Birthday Johann Sebastian Bach.
Soli deo gloria! Also Concordia college Moorhead 'motto Go Cobbers
I’m Bach! I can hear his music in my head!
All I get from Richard is a bunch of books I’ll never read!
Another impossible pairing. 8-(=(
I identify with both.
I like JS's comment about anger.
Richard preferred to off studying, as would I.
I voted for Richard (brain over heart), because I thought JS is more likely to win. He will understand, and not be angry with me ... 😉
Sometimes I vote but am very happy when the other wins! So well matched and virtuous and saintly are both
My classical music station was playing Bach when I went to vote, so . . . Bach it is!
I just want to thank whoever here recommended The Great Passion by James Runcie. It’s historical fiction about a year at the St Thomas Leipzig music school from the perspective of a 13-year-old boy soprano. Wonderful story and insights to the Bach family. I finished the book last night.
“As far as your person is concerned, you must not get angry with anyone...But, where your vocation requires it, there you must get angry.”
... “Surely I must confess, that if it be an Error to think that God may be merciful to save men even when they err; my greatest comfort is my error: were it not for the love I bear to this error: I would never wish to speak or to live.”
I love these quotes and I love them both! This is too hard! Without music, there'd be no need for Church and Hooker. Without the Church, would Bach's magnificent oeuvre be lost?
Should I get up on my stool for Hooker, since he's trailing? Or in my retirement should I take his advice -- “I am weary of the noise and oppositions of this place; and indeed, God and Nature did not intend me for Contentions, but for Study and quietness.” -- and vote for the sublime music?
My all-time theologian-hero is Richard Hooker. I enjoyed reading about him as a person and a priest with a life well lived. I would normally vote in Hooker, and his all-important "Middle Way", the often ignored "Via Media" he represents, over anyone else, any time.
But Bach! What an exquisite write-up. I recovered the memories of playing some of his exquisite violin works, as well as singing or hearing St John's Passion and other beautiful works. And again, the writer brought us into his life as a church musician and a Christian and a passionate Human Being. Bach won! Johann Sebastian Bach gets my vote today!
So easy for me to vote today: I need no further proof of the existence of God than music. And, in music, amidst many great composers, the incomparable
J. S. Bach stands above all.
Two luminaries which many will find hard to choose between, but much as I revere Hooker's gifts to the Anglican tradition, I'm all in for Bach. I likely would have been, anyway, as I'm a singer who has been privileged to perform some of his amazing music. But when Eva Suarez began writing about the opening of the St. John Passion, I could hear in my head the "swirling violins and piercing oboes and surprising dissonance... and the chorus [slicing] through the wall of sound – “HERR!” I'm grateful, too, for the reminder to return to a past Lenten practice of listening to (and, at times, singing along with) John Eliot Gardiner's fabulous performance of this amazing offering of music and faith.
Where would we be without his 'Messiah'?
Whoops!
Handel thanks you for your interest.
Today would have been Bach's birthday, but after his death, his birth date was changed from 3/21 to 3/31. I suspect, but cannot prove, one of the Gregory's from history. In any case, as a musician friend once said, "Ach! Bach!"
I stand with the Hookers! While I loved "sonic churn" and "picked liturgical fights," I am Hooked on "extremely slow Twitter war." I am convinced by Hooker's judicious and gracious theologizing that if God is merciful to those who err, and can save even Roman Catholics, then God might--just possibly might--save Elon Musk as well. I'm not saying it's likely or even desirable, just that it's possible. And while I'm at it, since there is much "sonic churn" lately over the legacy of Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL), that bungled razing of an ancient city to secure wealth and power for the American ruling class, the lying architects of which never faced any consequences, I wonder whether or how God might be merciful to us, who tolerate U.S. predations abroad and injustice and inequity at home, as long as pain is inflicted on dark-skinned people and people whose mother tongue is not English. On behalf of the women, girls, and men chanting "Woman, Life, Liberty" in Kurdish and Persian; on behalf of the people in the streets chanting "Louis XVI on l’a décapité, Macron on peut recommencer"; on behalf of union organizers in Argentina, the Philippines, and Brazil, I vote for Hooker, because there must be a way, some sort of WAY, to bring evildoers before the bar and to ensure a "viable" mode of being and the beloved community for the dispossessed and the powerless.
I humbly suggest taking a Lenten break from your political stress to listen to Bach's beautiful music today.
Thank you yet again, St. Celia, for capturing what matters in our broken, beautiful world. (I still voted for Bach, but I so appreciate what you have said here and why Hooker matters.)
I wish I could have voted for both of them, but I ended up with Bach. He already has a Golden Halo, so if Hooker wins, I won't cry.
Bach and the language of music! Don’t want to think of a world without. But, in these times so polarized, I am called to the Golden Mean. Richard, thank you!
It pains my heart not to vote for Richard, but—-Bach! I have Bach for the Golden Halo, but I don’t want to vote against Richard. Aargh!
This old seaman is of two minds. The wide and open ocean provides much in solitude and tyme for thinking many things of note. The sound of the waves, wind in the sails and whistling through the lines offer music known best to those who sail. It would be that I could vote for Johann Sebastian Hooker, or maybe for Richard Bach…. Ay, what a choice these canticles offer!
This is a difficult choice. Quiet study and contemplation or glorious music. Both hold deep value in my life. However, because the door to divine worship for me has always been through music, I cast my vote for Herr Bach.
I am a chorister who adores Bach and he would be my only necessary companion if stranded on a desert island.
However, Richard Hooker is vital to the faith I profess. I can't imagine what would have happened to Anglicanism without his wise thought and counsel and clear theological examination.
I'm distressed that these two are in opposition this round. But for my faith, I must vote for Richard Hooker.
I love this take on Bach as a perfectly regular saint, just going about his vocation as a daily offering to God in the spirit of 1 Corinthians 10:31.
I was a delegate at the 2001 General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada at which we formally - and wholeheartedly - entered into covenant with the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Canada. My pastor, The Dean and Rector of the Anglican Cathedral where I worship every Sunday, is Lutheran. Johann Sebastian Bach is my favourite composer. I voted for Richard Hooker because it is through his teachings that I understand the spirit of ecumenicism and stand on the stool of scripture, tradition and reason to reach the divine heights.
Two men who both have given long lasting gifts to Christianity are in the spotlight today. Hooker wrote convincingly of faith or works, and helped generations understand that faith, found in the deepest part of the soul, will provide salvation. I read his words and the logic of his argument is embedded in my beliefs and in my prayers. Bach's language is musical, and also speaks to the deepest part of the soul. So as I thought about how to vote today, I played some of Bach's music. BVW 147, Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring. And I read a translation of the words...
"Jesus remains my joy,
my heart's comfort and essence,
Jesus fends off all suffering,
He is my life's strength,
my eye's desire and sun,
my soul's treasure and pleasure;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesu,_Joy_of_Man%27s_Desiring
And I realized that Hooker's words are present in that beautiful music; The words find their deepest meaning for me through Bach's lyrics and music. As the music soars, so does my soul and my prayers. So... today, on Bach's Birthday, I voted for him.
While this is a tough vote, I didn't hesitate. I cast my vote for Bach. To hear his music, or get to sing it as we're now doing in my church choir, or play it as I did in a much earlier part of my life, is, to paraphrase a 14th century visitor to Paris's Sainte-Chapelle: to “believe oneself, as if rapt to heaven, entering the chambers of Paradise.” Looking back at the Bach's first LM write-up, I was also really touched to be reminded that he signed his music "for the Glory of God Alone" and by the description of his heavily annotated Bible. Hooker gave us so many tools for understanding the Christian life and being in community with each other. But Bach's music gives us a taste of Paradise itself; it's a form of extended contemplative prayer that brings us closer to God. Music, more than any other art form, I believe, gives us a taste of the eternal.
As spoken by the former Governator of Caleefornia,
"I'll be Bach."
I have not voted. I am struggling. Bach, a gifted musician, who seemed to have a reverence to God, for God, and with God. He seems frustrated and a bit irritable. He seems to be a devoted family man. Like myself, very flawed and a deep, devoted, and intimate relationship with God
I feel the same way about Hooker. He was devoted to God. He felt strongly enough about the Anglican way, that he wrote a book of governance! Unlike Bach, he was not in the limelight. He preferred a quiet and possibly a contemplative lifestyle.
For me they both seem spiritual and devoted to glorifying God through their respective vocations.
In the Bible, there are people who tended vineyards and people who tended sheep. (Some people moved around and some people had to stay in one place.) St. Johann Sebastian Bach was an artist who FELT and COMPOSED. St. Richard Hooker was an artist who THOUGHT and WROTE. Both were at their best, staying in one place, absorbing God's love, and creating to express who God was and to celebrate God's glory.
Via media still does it for me. Especially in light of gargantuan amounts of human blood spilled for theoretical arguments and political control.
I knew this one would be the worst match-up for me of the Saintly Sixteen. If in some horrible alternate universe I had to choose one composer and one only whose music would survive, agonizing though it would be axe Richard Wagner, Sergei Prokofiev, Ralph Vaughan Williams et al., it would have to be J.S. Bach. The closest I get to thinking maybe God does exist after all is when I listen to his fugues.
But we need the Via Media so desperately right now. And I’m always on board for theologians who are open-minded and compassionate. So I’m voting for Richard Hooker. Even more so after reading Megan Castellan’s lovely light on his personality!
Two notes though re J.S.:
1) Thank you, Supreme Committee, for giving him his full name!
2) The difficulty of pulling quotes by J.S. that bear any resemblance whatsoever to the sublimity of his music is hilariously illustrated in “A Bach Portrait” by P.D.Q. Bach, “the only forgotten son” of the Bach family according to musicologist Professor Peter Schickele, who rescued P.D.Q. from obscurity. (Some dare to claim he himself wrote all the music he says he rediscovered from P.D.Q., but I am sur that the uncanny resemblance of “A Bach Portrait” to “A Lincoln Portrait” written in 1942 by Aaron Copland is pure coincidence.) It’s a 14-minute work but you can snag an exemplary taste by coming in at about 11:07.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHlKY3TH7k8
Ah, Bach.