Monday, January 27, 2020

Finding the Beauty in the Bleak

No snow in the middle of Winter makes for a very bleak landscape. But there's still beauty in that bleakness if you look for it. So I went looking for that beauty on my weekly walk in the park this morning.

A tree fungus growing along the Dykeman Walking Trail
Barberries in the Dykeman Spring wetland
Someone set up a bird feeder by the north duck pond; this male House Finch likes that idea
A portrait of a very handsome fellow
Looking back across the meadow on the way out of the park
© 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Sunday, January 26, 2020

Sunday Bach - Epiphany 3


Bach wrote several cantatas for the third Sunday after Epiphany. Today we'll be listening to BWV 111, Was mein Gott will, das g'scheh allzeit (What my God wills always occurs, Leipzig 1725). This is a chorale cantata, based on the hymn of the same name. The subject is based on the Gospel reading of the day (Matthew 8:1 - 13), concerning the Roman centurion who came to Jesus to heal his servant. Bach's very complex score reflects the conflicting nuances of one of the great controversies of the early Christian community - whether Jesus' message was just for Jews or for Jews and Gentiles alike. Here's the late Craig Smith of Emmanuel Music on this lovely (and lively) cantata:
BWV 111 The story of the Centurion who has faith that Jesus will cure his servant brings forth from Bach in Cantata BWV 111 first a meditation on steadfast faith and finally martyrdom. The Cantata begins with a bracing and energetic chorale fantasia on the melody "Was mein Gott will, das g'scheh' allzeit."

This chorale has an interesting and important history. Beginning as an elegant chanson by de Sermissy, it is prominent in both the Lutheran and the Catholic liturgies. There is a Lassus mass bassed upon the tune, and many 17th Century German settings including a marvelous extremely contrapuntal one in the appendix of the Geistliche Chormusik of Heinrich Schütz. The melody is in Bar form but interestingly repeats the whole Stollen (first half repeated section) as the last two phrases of the Abgesang (second half). This complete recapitulation is of course useful in large settings of the chorale. Bach uses it to great advantage in both of his chorale fantasia versions. Strangely there is no extent Bach organ chorale prelude based on this melody.

The melody has another distinctive feature. Although it is solidly in the minor mode, the first phrase is in the relative major. Bach turns this into a wonderful moment in the chorus of BWV 111. The chorus entrance is in A minor and he modulates to a brilliant and assertive C Major at the cadence. Even by Bach's standards the energy of the piece is remarkable. The opening motive, first in the oboes then the strings, virtually explodes over a striding and purposeful bass. The choral parts remain in quarters and eighths, never going into the sixteenths that dominate the orchestral texture. This is straight-ahead battle music absolutely riveting in its strength and purpose.
The bass aria continues the aggressive, straight-ahead kind of writing. The declamation is unusual though. The phrase "Entsetze dich mein Herze nicht" is always broken with a pause after "entsetze" and a leap up to the word "nicht." This could be construed as a peculiarity of the moment but the words are declaimed in this fashion without exception. The effect is not halting or stumbling as Bach would sometimes set his text, but stubborn and considered. It is as if the soul is considering every possibility. The line of chorale is so subtly included into the texture that it can be easily missed.The aria is in an extremely sophisticated, written-out da capo form.

The secco alto recitative introduces the first signs that the theme of martyrdom will dominate the last half of the cantata. Is there any piece in all of Bach like the duet #4? The great striding melody with its volcanic eruptions of arpeggios and the thunderous dotted bass line all give the piece an heroic cast that is astonishing. Even the harmonic turns that propel us through the middle section of the opening section have a breadth that is overwhelming The choice of alto and tenor as the solo voices once again brings out the Janus-figure quality to the piece.The cadential heroic cries over the wild arpeggios in the violins have to be heard to be believed.

Bach seems to know that he must calm down before the end of this cantata so he gives the soprano recitative added weight of two obbligato oboes. The arioso of the last line with the calm oboe figuration is marvelous in its soothing effect. As if to emphasize structural intricacy of the chorale, Bach harmonizes the end of the Abgesang identically with the Stollen.

© Craig Smith
Today's performance is by the choir and orchestra of the J.S. Bach Foundation of Trogen, Switzerland under the direction of Rudolf Lutz. Enjoy!



Photo © 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Friday, January 24, 2020

Revisiting "A Christian Nation? The Founding Fathers Didn't Think So"

[Note: I wrote this post in 2011, but I decided to repost it along with an updated addendum because for me this is an important issue, especially important in these times when the US Constitution is under attack. The claim that this country is a "Christian nation" and the founding fathers were devout Christians is false. Below I include the history of the famous "establishment clause" of the first amendment, including transcripts from the discussions at the original constitutional convention, with quotes from James Madison and others involved in the discussions. Also included is the wording of the nation's first diplomatic treaty in 1797 which declares that the United States is not a Christian nation and is not founded on the Christian religion. In the addendum I include further quotes from the founding fathers, most especially from Thomas Jefferson, the man whose philosophy created the Constitution. It all very firmly establishes the idea of the "Christian nation" as a myth concocted by those who would return us to the very kind of autocracy this nation was created to oppose.]


There's a claim by the Christian Right and some members of the Tea Party movement that the United States was consciously and deliberately created as a Christian nation to spread the Gospel to the new world and create a beacon of light and salvation to the rest of the world. They haven't much evidence to back up this claim; just some scattered quotes from people like George Washington, made in their private capacity and not as spokespersons for the government or the nation.

Granted, we had plenty of people settle here in the early days in a quest to believe and practice those beliefs away from the oppression of the established churches of Europe, but they weren't the only people to leave Europe and settle here. There were plenty of people who were only nominal members of any church, or followers of the Enlightenment philosophers such as Voltaire who emphasized reason as the primary source of authority and knowledge. Or they were just farmers and trappers and whatnot who had no real use for religion in their life and were happy to go about their daily lives and work without need for religion. There was a lot of philosophical diversity in the early colonies which became the United States.

And in fact the the lawyers and merchants who formed the intellectual class from whom the founding fathers of this nation emerged were mostly followers of the Enlightenment, men such as Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, John Hancock, the Adamses of Boston, and Benjamin Franklin, self-declared Deists who believed in a higher power but denied the legitimacy of any formal religion. Even that ultimate gentleman farmer cum soldier, George Washington, considered himself a Deist. And it was these people who wrote our founding documents and created a purely secular, not religious, government.

The U.S. Constitution is the rock-solid foundation of the government of the United States; it establishes and guides our whole form of governance, from the legislative to the judicial to the administrative. It is, to use a Judeo-Christian reference, the Ten Commandments of the nation. It was written by men dedicated to reason and the Age of Enlightenment (principally James Madison, who himself was a protegé of Thomas Jefferson, probably the prime advocate of Enlightenment thinking, along with Benjamin Franklin, among the founding fathers), and it never mentions God, Jesus Christ, the Church, or the Bible. Never. Not even once. It only actually mentions matters pertaining to religion once, in the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." [2020 note: Actually, there is one reference to religion in the main text of the Constitution, in Article VI: "but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."]

The key phrase in that amendment is known in U.S. jurisprudence as the Establishment Clause - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." - which at the very beginning of our national existence says that the government cannot sponsor or enforce a religious belief and practice on the American people. There are people who argue that it does no such thing, that the amendment only says that the government can't favor one religion over the other. But the evidence, from the very records of the Constitutional Convention itself, along with the writings of the men who wrote the document, says otherwise.

The Library of Congress's Congressional Research Service (CRS) has released an annotated Constitution, and the Columbia University Law School has put a hyperlinked version online, which you can find here. The annotations quote the debates and discussions entered into at the convention, as well as the documents which express the ideas of those attending. The annotation page for the First Amendment can be found here, but I want to include passages from the "overview" section along with the footnotes for that section (included in brackets after the passage) that speak directly to the matter.
Madison’s original proposal for a bill of rights provision concerning religion read: “The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretence, infringed." [1 Annals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789).]

The language was altered in the House to read: “Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience." [The committee appointed to consider Madison’s proposals, and on which Madison served, with Vining as chairman, had rewritten the religion section to read: “No religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed.” After some debate during which Madison suggested that the word “national” might be inserted before the word “religion” as “point[ing] the amendment directly to the object it was intended to prevent,” the House adopted a substitute reading: “Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or infringing the rights of conscience.” 1 Annals of Congress 729–31 (August 15, 1789). On August 20, on motion of Fisher Ames, the language of the clause as quoted in the text was adopted. Id. at 766. According to Madison’s biographer, “[t]here can be little doubt that this was written by Madison.” I. Brant, James Madison—Father of the Constitution 1787–1800 at 271 (1950).]

In the Senate, the section adopted read: “Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith, or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion, . . ." [This text, taken from the Senate Journal of September 9, 1789, appears in 2 B. Schwartz (ed.), The Bill of Rights: A Documentary History 1153 (1971). It was at this point that the religion clauses were joined with the freedom of expression clauses.]

It was in the conference committee of the two bodies, chaired by Madison, that the present language was written with its some[p.970]what more indefinite “respecting” phraseology. [1 Annals of Congress 913 (September 24, 1789). The Senate concurred the same day. See I. Brant, James Madison—Father of the Constitution 1787–1800, 271–72 (1950).]

Debate in Congress lends little assistance in interpreting the religion clauses; Madison’s position, as well as that of Jefferson who influenced him, is fairly clear... [During House debate, Madison told his fellow Members that “he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any Manner contrary to their conscience.” 1 Annals of Congress 730 (August 15, 1789). That his conception of “establishment” was quite broad is revealed in his veto as President in 1811 of a bill which in granting land reserved a parcel for a Baptist Church in Salem, Mississippi; the action, explained President Madison, “comprises a principle and precedent for the appropriation of funds of the United States for the use and support of religious societies, contrary to the article of the Constitution which declares that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment.”’ 8 The Writings of James Madison (G. Hunt. ed.) 132–33 (1904). Madison’s views were no doubt influenced by the fight in the Virginia legislature in 1784–1785 in which he successfully led the opposition to a tax to support teachers of religion in Virginia and in the course of which he drafted his “Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments” setting forth his thoughts. Id. at 183–91; I. Brant, James Madison—The Nationalist 1780–1787, 343–55 (1948). Acting on the momentum of this effort, Madison secured passage of Jefferson’s “Bill for Religious Liberty”. Id. at 354; D. Malone, Jefferson the Virginian 274–280 (1948). The theme of the writings of both was that it was wrong to offer public support of any religion in particular or of religion in general.]
Obviously Madison and the others were intent on keeping the U.S. government out of the business of religion. Note especially this quote from Madison in the Annals of Congress:
During House debate, Madison told his fellow Members that “he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any Manner contrary to their conscience.” 1 Annals of Congress 730 (August 15, 1789).
This is a clear declaration of a hands-off policy toward religion by the government, expressed by the architects of the document which is the foundation of that government.

There have been many acts by the government which have highlighted the thinking of these founding fathers, a philosophy that has come to be known as the "separation of Church and State", but perhaps one of the clearest actions on that philosophy came early in the history of the U.S. government with the 1797 treaty with Tripoli in the Barbary States of north Africa.

Joel Barlow was the consul-general to the Barbary states of Algiers, Tripoli, and Tunis; he was assigned by Commissioner Plenipotentiary of the U.S. David Humphries to broker a treaty with Tripoli in 1796. Most of the treaty concerns trade agreements, tariffs, rights-of-way for shipping, etc.; mundane stuff. But Article 11 of the treaty makes a bold statement regarding the attitude of the U.S. toward the religion of Tripoli and the other Barbary States:
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
There it is, right out in the open in black and white on an official document of the U.S. government: "...the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..." In 1796, only seven years after the ratification of the Constitution. You can't get any clearer than that.

There's been an argument advanced that Article 11 says no such thing in the original Arabic document, and that it was a late insertion by the Dey of Algiers to allay the fears of the Pasha of Tripoli. But that's irrelevant, a straw man put up by opponents of church-state separation. No matter what the Arabic document says, Joel Barlow's English translation - including that eleventh article - is what was presented to President John Adams, who then presented it to the Senate, in printed copy and read aloud on the floor of the Senate. These were men who were in at the beginning of the nation, many of them former members of the Continental Congress, signers of the Declaration of Independence, and members of the Congress which wrote the Constitution. They ratified the treaty by unanimous vote on June 7, 1797, and President Adams signed it. They had all heard and read that phrase - "...the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..." - and no one objected; in fact no one said anything at all about it. Why? Because this is what they believed.

So those who would want to rewrite our history to conform to their particular, sectarian ideology, led most notably by David Barton (who interestingly has no degree in history but rather a bachelor's degree in religious education from Oral Roberts University) and his Wallbuilders organization, haven't a leg to stand on. By their own private writings and in the national documents they inspired and helped create, the "Founding Fathers" of the United States were not intent on creating a "Christian nation", but rather a fully secular government with a clear hands-off policy toward religion. There's really no question of that at all.

© 2011 by A. Roy Hilbinger. Images owned by the United States and are public domain.

2020 Addendum:

Of the Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson had the most to say about the separation of church and state, starting with inventing that very phrase in his famous letter to the Danbury (CT) Baptist Association in 1802:
To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State (emphasis mine). Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem.
(signed) Thomas Jefferson
 Jan.1.1802.
This isn't the only incident when Jefferson addressed the issue. Here are some more of his thoughts on that "wall of separation":
“Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of it's protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination.”
― Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography of Thomas Jefferson

“But our rulers can have authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. If it be said, his testimony in a court of justice cannot be relied on, reject it then, and be the stigma on him. Constraint may make him worse by making him a hypocrite, but it will never make him a truer man. It may fix him obstinately in his errors, but will not cure them. Reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error.”
― Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia
“Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person’s life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the “wall of separation between church and state,” therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.
We have solved … the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.”
~Thomas Jefferson: in a speech to the Virginia Baptists (1808)

“In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is error alone that needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”
~Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Horatio Spofford, 1814

“Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.”- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
James Madison was Jefferson's protegé, and in a way he further distilled Jefferson's thinking:
“The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries."
[Letter objecting to the use of government land for churches, 1803] ― James Madison

“Every new & successful example therefore of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance. And I have no doubt that every new example, will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt. will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."
[Letter to Edward Livingston, 10 July 1822 - Writings 9:100--103] ― James Madison: Writings

“Besides the danger of a direct mixture of religion and civil government, there is an evil which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by ecclesiastical corporations. The establishment of the chaplainship in Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights as well as of Constitutional principles. The danger of silent accumulations and encroachments by ecclesiastical bodies has not sufficiently engaged attention in the U.S.”
― James Madison
In many ways Thomas Paine was one of the inspirations of the American Revolution, publishing and distributing pamphlets that had him constantly under a warrant for sedition from the British colonial government. Paine was no friend of religion!
“One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.”
― Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

“Persecution is not an original feature in any religion; but it is always the strongly marked feature of all religions established by law.”
― Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason 
George Mason was another Virginian with strong beliefs about church and state:
“It is contrary to the principles of reason and justice that any should be compelled to contribute to the maintenance of a church with which their consciences will not permit them to join, and from which they can derive no benefit; for remedy whereof, and that equal liberty as well religious as civil, may be universally extended to all the good people of this commonwealth.”
~George Mason, Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776
Of course, the prime disciple of Voltaire and the French Enlightenment in the colonies was Benjamin Franklin, and he had a few things to say about the subject as well:
“When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obligated to call for help of the civil power, it’s a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”
— Benjamin Franklin, letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780

“If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish Church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. These found it wrong in the bishops, but fell into the same practice themselves both here [in England] and in New England.”
—Benjamin Franklin
John Adams, the curmudgeonly Founding Father from Boston, also commented on the subject:
“The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.”
— John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” 1787-1788

“Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”
— John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” (1787-88)
And finally, Declaration of Independence signer Elbridge Gerry, James Madison's vice-president, sums it all up:
“No religious doctrine shall be established by law.”
~Elbridge Gerry, Annals of Congress 1:729-731
The point of all this is that contrary to the claims of the evangelical culture warriors, the United States wasn't intended to be a "Christian nation" and the Founding Fathers were not devout believers but critical thinkers who valued reason over religion. And the principles of that Enlightenment thinking were hard-wired into the Constitution they wrote, intent on keeping government and religion as far apart as possible.

It's really not all that hard to understand. If your church opposes abortion, let it deal with it among its members. If your church opposes same-sex marriage and considers homosexuality to be a sin, let them enforce that within their own congregations. But to try and force that on people who are not members is a violation of the Constitution. To force any version of Christianity, or Islam or Judaism or Buddhism or even Scientology for that matter, on all Americans is a violation of the Constitution. It is, in effect, un-American.

© 2011 and 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger 

Monday, January 20, 2020

Icy

We had one of those lovely "wintry mix" storms Saturday - started off as snow and changed to sleet and then freezing rain later. It left an icy glaze on everything that's still here on Monday. Here are some icy scenes from my weekly walk in the nature park this morning.

The "back door" entrance to the park on the Dykeman Walking Trail
Ice and shadows on the old railroad trestle make for an interesting abstract shot
An icy woodland scene in the park
Part of a large flock of Canada Geese by the south duck pond
© 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger 

Sunday, January 19, 2020

Sunday Bach - Epiphany 2


Bach wrote several cantatas for the second Sunday after Epiphany, and I think our choice for today is his grandest and most beautiful - Ach Gott, wie manches Herzeleid (Ah God, how many heartaches, Leipzig 1725). The subject of the Gospel reading for the day is the wedding at Cana, but the focus isn't on the miraculous changing of water into wine but rather on the start of Jesus' public career and the difficulties that will involve. The cantata itself has a lot going on musically. Here's the late Craig Smith of Emmanuel Music to explain it all:
The wedding at Cana was Christ's first miracle and is the Gospel reading for the 2 nd Sunday in the Epiphany. All three of the cantatas for that day are concerned less with the miracle than the mysterious line of Jesus answering his mother's plea for help: in the KJV "Woman, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come." All three cantatas associate this day with the beginning of Christ's difficult journey, and by association our souls' difficult journey.

The chorale "Ach Gott, wie manches Herzeleid" was a favorite of Bach but not particularly popular in the canon of Lutheran chorales. We see very few settings of it by other composers. Bach's versions of the melody cover an enormous range, from the brilliant and vivacious allegro that ends Cantata BWV 58, through the crabbèd and knotty continuo-with-soprano setting in Cantata BWV 44. Our setting that begins Cantata BWV 3 is the most exotic sounding of all and one of the most ravishing bits of chromaticism in all of Bach.

The chorus begins with a quiet string chord that becomes the accompaniment to an extraordinarily expressive and chromatic oboe d'amore line. Soon the other oboe enters and the two sing an amazing duet above a string part that includes both sustained chords and also an expressive sighing motive that goes through the movement. The entrance of the chorus is magical. The chorale is in the bass, doubled by a trombone. The sopranos, altos, and tenors enter before the bass chorale with the same theme as the oboes. The only accompaniment is a sketchy and barren string part. The most important point about the harmony throughout this movement is that for all of its chromaticism, it has a kind of warm melancholy glow about it. It is worlds away from the kind of harshness that we saw, for instance in the opening chorus of BWV 101 or, for that matter, in the version of "Ach Gott, wie manches Herzeleid" in Cantata BWV 44. Each line of text is highly characterized. Notice how "Der schmale Weg ist trübsal voll" includes in the vocal parts not only the opening theme but also a new trudging countermelody. This rising line will come back to us in the last phrase in "Den ich zum Himmel wandern soll." The whole color of this movement is bathed in a kind of Romantic glow that is unique in Bach. The chorale with tropes movement #2 is like a splash of cold water. Only continuo accompanies the chorus and soloists. The harmony is hard and brittle instead of warm and rounded. Each phrase is introduced by a tough little reduction of the chorale theme. All of the mysterious cross relations that Bach found in the first movement are gone, replaced by an almost banal diatonicism. The journey has begun.

The chorale with tropes leads directly into the bass aria with continuo. The aria treats "hell and pain" in an almost abstract manner. One could almost call smug the way that the opening line is encapsulated in the texture. The opening jagged line is omnipresent in the aria and undergoes amazing transformations as it underpins what is mostly a joyful and confident text. At first the aria, a full da capo, can seem too long, but its secure doctrine is at the spiritual center of this cantata. Its bare-bones quality makes one long for the richness of the opening chorus.

The soprano-alto duet, which follows a brief secco tenor recitative, occupies a halfway ground between the lush opening and the thorny bass aria. For all of its easy melodiousness and childlike quality, it is very complex in phrasing and textual content. The opening tune seems so easy until one tries to figure out how it really is phrased. The phrasing throughout the movement is complex and determined with Bach's most artful overlaps. Look at what happens with the connection between the 2nd line of text back to the first. The alto is still firmly in E Major while the soprano begins its line in A Major. The duet is one of those pieces that is very difficult for performers and when successfully played will seem completely artless to the listener. The final chorale harmonization is rich without ever reverting to the lushness of the opening. 

© Craig Smith
Today's performance is from a recording by the Monteverdi Choir and the English Baroque Soloists under the direction of John Eliot Gardiner. Enjoy!

Photo © 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Saturday, January 18, 2020

A Port in the Storm

We got some more snow this morning before it changed to sleet and freezing rain this afternoon and evening. At the height of the snow my feeder station got very busy. I guess this was the bird version of buying the stores out of bread and milk at the first sign of snow.

Mama Red visits the feeder for a quick nosh before flying off into the snow
A House Finch, a House Sparrow, and a Junco grabbing a bite
© 2020 by A.Roy Hilbinger

Tuesday, January 14, 2020

Snowless Winter Scenes

Most people would consider a Winter landscape without snow a bleak, colorless scene. Some days, depending on my mood, I would agree. But most of the time when I step out into nature with the camera, I see the color others often miss, a kaleidoscope of subtle color close to, but not quite, a monotone. Today I went into the Dykeman Spring Nature Park chasing that color.

Cattails in Winter
Bittersweet berries withering with age and the cold
Landscape with Birches and Martin house
The creek in the park from the red bridge
One of the north pond's resident Muskrats out for a morning swim
A group of Mallards and visiting domestics gathered by the south pond
© 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Monday, January 13, 2020

On and Around the Rail Trail

I decided to take the new camera up on the Cumberland Valley Rail Trail this morning and put it through its paces on one of my favorite hikes. I got some nice trail shots but there were no cows out by the trail, and I was really in the mood for cows today. So I went back to Fogelsonger Rd. and headed up it. There were cows and a springhouse waiting for their moment in the limelight there. And on the way back into town on Route 696 I got the chance to get a good shot of the heronry along Middle Spring Creek. A heronry is a Heron nesting colony, and last Fall the fellow who lives across the road and owns the field and trees it's on pointed it out to me. You couldn't see too much because there was still lots of foliage on the trees, but now that the trees are bare you can see all the nests in the tops of the trees. He said there were around 30 nests up there, and I do believe he's right! I didn't know we had that many Great Blue Herons in the area! I'm certainly going to keep a close watch on the place this Spring to see how many of those nests actually get used.

The old trailhead at the township park on Britton Rd.
Walking along the Rail Trail
Shelf fungus on a tree along the trail
Cows along Fogelsonger Rd.
A springhouse along Burd Run
The heronry by Middle Spring Creek
© 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Sunday, January 12, 2020

Sunday Bach - Epiphany 1


Bach wrote several cantatas for the first Sunday after Epiphany; the one I've chosen for tody is BWV 124, Meinen Jesum laß ich nicht (I won't leave my Jesus, Leipzig 1725). This is a chorale cantata dealing with the story of the 12-year-ols Jesus in the temple in Jerusalem. Here's the late Craig Smith of Emmanuel Music on this work:
The Gospel reading concerning the 12-year-old Jesus in the temple is one of the most vivid in all of the New Testament. It long has been a favorite subject for composers. One of the lovliest pieces in all of Schütz is his setting of the story, partly dramatic and partly a beautiful ground bass setting of verses from Psalm 84 for Mary, Joseph and Jesus. Bach’s cantata for the 1st Sunday after the Epiphany is a jewel. Although not directly referring to the story, it is permeated with the childlike sense of wonder and wisdom. The opening chorus the cantata BWV 124 is one of the greatest. It is so transparent in texture, so casually economical in means that, looking at the score, one could miss how extraordinary it is. Its form is that of an oboe d’amore concerto. The strings are remarkably restrained, most of the time playing almost sketchy looking chords upon which the oboe d’amore plays its roulades. The opening theme is, in character, a minuet. Gradually the theme expands to include graceful dotted rhythms that become the main motion into the cadences. The harmony is so transparent that the chorus parts are actually the richest things in the piece. The beautiful melody, one of Bach’s favorites is gorgeously harmonized. Notice the ravishing suspensions in bars 25-27. The choral writing is full of colorful text painting, much of it plays on words about leaving, holding and the light. Echo effects at the end make the final “lass ich nicht” even more poignant. The very simplicity of the texture makes for extraordinary possibilities of sophisticated phrasing. In bar 73, for instance the word “kleben” (hold) is held through the beginning of the concerto entrance. Its final cuttoff is at exactly the moment that you don’t expect it.

After a secco recitative, the tenor sings an aria about the cruel strokes of death. One expects something heavy and ponderous. Here again Bach keeps the texture light. The Oboe d’amore plays a winding tune over the light strokes of the strings.
For all of its drama, the there is something childlike about the piece. It is full of the most wonderful touches, for instance the joining of the oboe and tenor in sixths on the words “Doch tröstet sich die Zuversicht” The bass recitative is warm and radiant. Exactly in keeping with the character of the piece.

We have seen three or four wonderful “running with stumbling footstep” pieces in the 2nd Jahrgang. The most notable is the famous duet from BWV 78. Our duet here for soprano and alto runs more than ambles but has some of the same appealing qualities. It is surprising that it is not more well-known. The continuo line is particularly appealing: the leaps of the tenths are especially charming. The final chorale is equally beautiful. It somewhat resembles the marvelous harmonization, also in E major, that ended the first version of the St. Matthew Passion.

© Craig Smith
Today's performance is from a recording by the Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra and Choir under the direction of Ton Koopman. Enjoy!

 

Photo © 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Wednesday, January 08, 2020

A Little More Snow

We got a little more snow overnight and into this morning. Just two or three inches, but enough to at least be scenic. On my way to the grocery store this morning I cut through the nature park and took a few photos.

Entering the park on the Dykeman Walking Trail
Snow-capped Viburnum berries along the trail
Along the trail in the wetland
Barberries in the snow in the wetland
Wind-sculpted snow up on the meadow
The view to the north from the top of the meadow
© 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Monday, January 06, 2020

Bird Portraits

Given that great lens on my new camera, I decided to dedicate this week's walk in the Dykeman Spring Nature Park to seeing what birds I could capture. My main goal was the park's resident Belted Kingfisher, who is notoriously difficult to keep up with. What I didn't count on was the wind picking up before I got to the park; by the time I got there the birds were going deep into shelter. Still, I managed to get some decent shots, but it was like playing hide-and-seek, and most of the shots include intervening twigs and branches. And no, I never did catch up with the Kingfisher; he just wouldn't sit still!

A Slate-colored Junco along the Dykeman Walking Trail
A male Northern Cardinal in the woods along the creek in the park
A juvenile Great Blue Heron perched waaaayyyyy up in the treetops
A Red-bellied Woodpecker along the nature trail
© 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Sunday, January 05, 2020

A Busy Morning at the Feeders

It was a busy morning at the feeders in my back yard this morning. Mostly it was House Finches and Juncos, but there was a visiting Gray Squirrel scooping up the spillage underneath as well.

Mr. & Mrs. House Finch at breakfast
A Junco and a House Finch take seats at the breakfast table
Meanwhile Mr. Squirrel cleans up the spillage below
© 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Sunday Bach - Epiphany


I know, I know, I'm a day early for Epiphany, but Bach's cantatas for the second Sunday after Christmas are so blah! So today we'll listen to a cantata for Epiphany (aka Twelfth Night, aka Three Kings Day), a major festival in the Church Year, celebrating the visit to the infant Christ in Bethlehem by the three wise men from the East (or kings, as tradition sometimes has it). It's also the final day of the Twelve Days of Christmas; the Christmas season officially stops here. Bach wrote several cantatas for this festival, most notably the sixth and final cantata of his massive Christmas Oratorio. But of all the cantatas he wrote for the Christmas season, the one I've chosen for today is the only one actually telling the story of the events celebrated rather than focusing on the theology - BWV 65, Sie Werden aus Saba alle kommen (They will all come from Sheba, Leipzig 1724). And it's a beauty, incorporating all kinds of musical effects to act as a sort of soundtrack to the story of the Three Kings. Here's the late Craig Smith of Emmanuel Music on this unique cantata:
Many cantatas for the Christmas season are not deeply involved with the Christmas story, but assume a contemplative attitude with a minimum of narrative. The Cantata BWV 65 not only directly quotes Isaiah’s prediction of the Wise Men, but contrasts it with a chorale description of how that prediction came true. Thus, the unusual placement of a chorale immediately after the opening chorus sets off the principal thrust of the piece: the gifts of the Wise Men are a reflection of the gift of God in fulfilling the words of Isaiah. 
The opening chorus has a wonderful, exotic, “Eastern” sounding orchestration with pairs of recorders, oboes da caccia and horns as well as the usual strings and continuo. The loping 9/8 meter gives the piece a charming “camel music” quality. This cantata contains the only example of horns in C in all of Bach’s music. The beginning tutti shows the richness of color available to Bach with this combination of instruments. The sound of the piece comes not only from the exotic combination of instruments but also from the abundance of octave doublings. This interest in octaves culminates in the final cadence of the tutti, which contains a rarely-heard unison from the entire orchestra. The choral writing is marvelously varied with block-like writing, imitative writing, and a full-fledged choral fugue. In his book “The Compositional Process of J.S. Bach,” Robert Marshall describes ingeniously how Bach “thinks on his feet” in the writing of this fugue. In fact, one of the great glories of the first Jahrgang is the new way in which Bach is able to fold choral fugues into a more homophonic texture. This is particularly striking in a work such as this that has horns with few available chromatic notes. Bach makes an event out of the return of the horns to the orchestral texture by surprisingly overlapping them with the end of the fugue. 
The chorale that follows, a verse of “Ein Kind, geborn zu Bethelehem,” is austere, almost barren in its harmonization. It is as if the richness of Isaiah’s prophecy is contrasted with the meager circumstances of Christ’s birth. The recitative that follows is a classic example of Bach’s sensitivity to the shape and function of the text. The first half, which recounts the story of the wise men, begins in F major and modulates to G major. At the beginning of the contemplative section, where the speaker examines how these events affect him, the bass moves down to a six-four-two chord and sends the recitative in a harmonically different direction. 
Bach uses the dark sound of the two oboes da caccia as obbligati for the bass aria. Notice how the opening theme, so closely imitative and evocative of gold, is transformed into the gold torn from the earth by the drop of an octave at the end of the third line. The canon here is exclusively associated with the inadequacy of the gold offerings. The offering of the Christian’s heart is accompanied by euphonious parallel thirds in the obbligato instruments. 
The secco tenor recitative is appropriately didactic, and offers a perfect foil for the return to the extravagant orchestration that accompanies the opening of the next tenor aria. The main tune of this aria is clearly related to the opening idea of the chorus. Even more, the “oriental” octave doublings bring us back into that world. There is something popular in the character of this spirited piece. It is bar-form, something rather unusual in non-chorale related pieces in Bach. The simple folksy vocal writing at the beginning is a wonderful contrast to the exuberant melismas of the final section. 
Not only the choice of a verse from “Was mein Gott will, das g’scheh allzeit,” but also its austere harmonization, is surprising compared to the color of the rest of the cantata. Perhaps Bach is preparing us for the sobriety of the Epiphany season. Its simplicity is very much in keeping with the presentation of the other chorale, and gives us a slightly different relationship between the chorale and the concerted music that we are used to in first Jahrgang pieces.

© Craig Smith
Today's performance is from a recording by the Gabrieli Consort and Players under the direction of Paul McCreesh. Enjoy!


Photo © 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger 

Friday, January 03, 2020

Lunch with Ms. Sparrow

This new camera seems to be really good for capturing birds. I got these shots of a female House Sparrow at the tower feeder while I was putting lunch together. I really like this lens!



© 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger

Thursday, January 02, 2020

New Camera

I got a new camera - a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300. I've been using Canon cameras for the last 20 years or so, so I had to learn a whole new architecture. It took a few days to familiarize myself with how it worked, and today I felt competent enough to take it out for a test run. Like the Canons I've been using, this isn't a DSLR (I still can't afford one of those) but rather what's called a "bridge" camera - a step between point-and-shoot and a DSLR; it has all the manual settings of a DSLR but only has the single lens.

In any case, I'm very pleased with this camera. The lens is way better, the focus is much clearer, the macro setting is wonderful, and it has a manual focus that's to die for. Here are the best shots of the day.

The old railroad trestle on the Dykeman Walking Trail
The view of the creek from the red bridge in the Dykeman Spring Nature Park
The red bridge
One of the benches by the north duck pond
A Hemlock cone by the above bench. This is how good that macro function is!
A view across the wetland
A Sycamore seed ball hanging over Gum Run, taken with the zoom and the manual focus
© 2020 by A. Roy Hilbinger