I have already left behind my thoughts on van Dyke’s hymn posted several days ago & moved on to other issues. Re: Loud Music in Church Worship? However I received two challenges to my understanding of van Dyke’s hymn.
Both essentially argue that I am unjustifiably over-reading & attributing universalistic elements (“eisegesis rather than exegesis!”). Even if it is granted that my theological “rebuttals” in content are correct BUT “there is no such intent in this case. If you assume Van Dyke wrote this with the intention that it be sung by believers, everything is pretty sound.”
My Response:
First, I am not legislating whether someone may or may not sing van Dyke’s hymn.
Second, given the poetic genre of van Dyke’s hymn, it is natural that any interpreter can only offer a more responsible and plausible hermeneutical interpretation. The The question is not whether the hymn could be read non-universalistically (it can), but whether that reading is textually and theologically stronger than the universalistic one.
My interpretation of van Dyke’s piece as a hymn with universalistic themes is based on the following considerations:
1) Contrast the use of maximal, unqualified universals used throughout the hymn- “hearts”, “mortals”, “all who live in love” (not just believers) with Christian salvation for the elect & believers. No hint of the boundaries of salvation – all this is very consistent with the spirit of the unitarian-universalist Church (soteriological universalism)
.
2) Contrast the dominance of unconditional universal benevolence of God with no exception (“Thou art giving and forgiving Ever blessing, ever blest”) with classical non-universalist theologies with themes like divine judgment – Ha, reminds me of Richard Niehuhr’s wry comment about universalists like van Dyke who taught – “God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross” Niebuhr’s indictment was aimed at the wider Liberal Protestant Movement in USA in the 1930s, but the Unitarian-Universalist Church does fit the bill since it is inherently-deliberately universalistic as it embraces diverse spiritual paths, including Christian, Buddhist, Humanist, Pagan, and more, seeing value in all. It’s a non-creedal faith that draws wisdom from many world religions and philosophies, valuing the inherent worth of every person and seeking truth and meaning from diverse sources, not a single dogma.
3) The eschatology is one with open ended anticipation – “Mortals, join the mighty chorus”
This is invitation without qualification or condition. The eschatology is not “some join, some do not,” but all are summoned and expected to join the cosmic harmony.
4) Reception history – while the Unitarian-Universalist Church carefully excludes hymns with traditional cross based soteriology, it includes the hymn is included in the Unitarian-Universalist Church’s primary hymnal, Singing the Living Tradition. This adoption confirms that the hymn natural resonance with the Unitarian-Universalist theology.
5) Supplementary point – Read van Dykes’ story, The Other Wise Man (who somehow missed joining the three wise men in their journey to Bethlehem & missed meeting Christ but was still saved in the end) for a concrete, correlation of the universalistic teaching of the hymn.
In short, while one can never offer a conclusive knock-down logical proof in poetic interpretation, the cumulative evidence listed above confirms that my interpretation is justifiable, more plausible and indeed more likely, that is, **When read on its own theological and poetic terms, “Joyful, Joyful We Adore Thee” more naturally coheres with a universalist vision of divine benevolence and cosmic harmony than with traditional Christian soteriology which emphasises boundaries of Christ salvation, eschatological judgment and eternal exclusion of sinners from God.
Again, please note that I am only offering what I think is the most natural interpretation based on wider theological analysis without legislating whether believers of Christ may or may not sing this hymn.
In short, van Dyke may be regarded as a (religious) “universalist” & “pluralist” insofar as he taught that “saving truths expressed through works of love is found in all spiritual traditions, not just one”.
See his prefatory poem of his book, The Story of the Other Wise Man.
“Who seeks for heaven alone to save his soul,
May keep the path, but will not reach the goal;
While he who walks in love may wander far,
Yet God will bring him where the blessed are.”