There are a myriad of answers for this issue, but I will only focus on one area. Let’s begin by thinking a little differently.
Have you ever ordered fast food from the pictures you see on the restaurant’s display and then were a little taken back when what you received bore very little likeness to the savory dish on the wall? Sometimes what we expect and what the reality is are two entirely difference things. Sometimes one of the reasons we have trouble worshiping is that what we thought our worship experience should be does not match what really happens.
To get the heart of the matter, we need to answer some basic questions: What determines how we enter worship? What do we expect to happen when we enter the sanctuary to worship on Sunday?
–An overwhelming experience with the Living God?
– How do we learn to base our expectation?
– Past experience?
– Preconceived ideas of those leading?
– The situations or arguments from which we left to go to church?
Our expectations, what we believe will happen, greatly influences how we will worship. What do you expect when you walk into worship last Sunday? On what do you base your expectation?
Part of our preparation for corporate worship is faith that the God we worship will hear and receive what we bring. However, if our focus is inward, then we approach worship from what we will 'get out of it' and base our expectations from that viewpoint. Let me give an example.
I remember going to the store with my wife to get Christmas gifts for our children when they were young. We knew what they really wanted and have saved for the occasion, since our income was limited and the option of getting 'anything or everything' wasn't possible. There was a joyful anticipation not only looking for the gift, but thinking about the smiles and giggles of watching them open and play with them. The reason we got the gifts was not so we would feel good, but for the joy we knew it would bring them.
One of the problems with our personal preparation with worship is that sometimes our primary focus is more like the children looking for the gifts, than the parents giving them. These feelings are not bad, just immature. To the child, the point of Christmas is the gifts. The later demonstrates that the reason gifts were given was for the personal pleasure it brought to the person giving them. Our primary focus in worship must be God, not the feelings, or blessings, but hearing and responding in obedience to Him, so that we are bringing our lives, our will, our emotions, all that we are as a sacrifice before Him.
Our focus can also be revealed by how we describe the activity. Statements like, "I'm going to hear _____ preach," or "I'm excited because _______ is leading worship," seem to point more what we might receive than the opportunity of offering our 'sacrifice of praise.’ It is natural to respond to some leaders more than others, but the issue of whether we worship or not should not be governed by others. We are responsible before God to offer Him our worship regardless.
How many times do we think to ourselves or say to others, “I’m so excited because I’m going to spend time worshiping God!” ? In the Old Testament, the responsibility to worship did not change even when the leadership was not godly. When Eli was High Priest, his two sons, Hophni and Phineas were responsible for part of the sacrifices that the people of Israel were offering. The condemnation from God, spoken to the young Samuel, was to Eli and his sons, whom he failed to teach and who sinned flagrantly against God. God did not tell the young boy prophet that because the High Priest and his sons were wrong that the people did not need to offer their sacrifices. The people were responsible before God to be obedient and to worship Him regardless who was in charge. The point is this: our focus must be on God, not the leadership on the platform. If you are dependent on a specific person to be able to worship or hear a word from God, then there is a possibility that the focus is more on a person than on God, Himself.
I can remember leading worship at a specific time when I honestly wasn’t to thrilled with the person that was going to be preaching. I tried to refocus, asked the Lord to help me through this and to help those there to really see Him. God was faithful. From the lips of this very person I really didn’t want to listen to came an insight from Scripture that was just what I needed at that time. When God turned my focus back on Him, I was more open to hearing what He had to say.
Another issue is the belief that those in leadership positions are responsible for how well we worship. No to unlike the Olympics, many in the congregation gather listening to the music, songs, sermon and then pronounce their judgment: “Great day, I felt a full 9.6 today. --Or the music was a little off, not enough beat, sermon wasn’t up to par, only got to at 3.5 this morning.” Whether or not we say it out loud or not, when we think such things we are revealing that our worship is dependent on the good performance of those on the platform more than our obedient response to God’s revelation.
True worship is that obedient response to God’s revealed nature and character. It is a choice we make, not a feeling we have.
Let’s summarize “What to Do When You Are Having Problems Worshiping”
– Look at your expectations in worship
– Remember that we are not the focus of worship, but God
– We are responsible to worship, regardless of the leadership.
– Worship is a choice to respond in obedience, not a feeling we have.
How can we transform our expectations to those that will be pleasing to God?
This list is by no means exhaustive, but may serve to at least get things started:
1. First, we need to be students of what biblical worship truly is. Then, begin to ask the difficult questions:
2. Are we coming with 'clean hands and pure heart'? Psalm 24:3-4
3. Have we been reconciled with others; forgiving those who have offend us and asking forgiveness from those we have offended? Matt. 5:23-4; 18
4. Are we approaching worship 'thanking God for what He has done and praising Him for who He is? Psalm 100:3-4
5. Are we being obedient to what God has already commanded us to do?
6. Are we coming to worship focusing more on what we may get out of it, than the joy of pleasing God?
7. Is our focus on those that might be leading or preaching, than on giving to God an obedient response?
As we begin to shift our focus and expectations our experience of worship will take on new depth and meaning and we can begin to address at least one of the problems involved in worship.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Monday, January 24, 2011
Love and Worship
Love is a commitment that fulfills itself in action. Worship is the obedient response to the revealed nature and character of God. To reduce either to mere feelings misses the depth in both.
Perhaps one of the most well known passages on love is found in 1 Corinthians 13:
1 If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
In verses 1-3 we learn that we can do many things, but doing alone does not guarantee love. In verses 4-8a we learn that love is like the nature of God, Himself. The commitment part of love cannot rest without the actions that are in line with the nature and character of God. The power for the commitment of this self-giving motivation can only come from God, Himself. “For God so loved, He gave His only Son....” John 3:16 does not say that God felt so sorry for sinners, or that He was trying to fulfill some need in His being, for God has no needs and does not lack anything. His was a willful commitment to us, without any possibility of return. He did not do it so because it “felt” good.
As believers, we need to be cautious that we reduce love to what we can feel. Feelings are like fruit, sometimes they are there and sometimes they are not. But to say that one must have feelings of that one must have a certain feeling or even a certain level of feelings in order to say that we love, then we have gone beyond the example of Scripture.
Although the two are different, there are some similarities between love and worship that bear bringing to light. Many times there are certain emotions as a result of worship, but those feelings can never be the measure of the depth of our worship, any more than looking only at an apple can tell us the size of the tree from which it fell. Worship, first and foremost is an obedient response to the revealed nature and character of God. There may or may not be a flood of feelings linked to it. Sometimes we are overwhelmed with the absolute awesomeness of a Holy God and other times there is a quiet peace and joy. There may be times that we believe God is there and working, even when we don’t “feel” His presence. He has called us to live by faith, not by feelings.
Reducing worship to a feeling also reverses the focus of worship. The focus of worship is always toward God and God alone. The focus of feelings is inward, personal. By measuring our worship by our feelings we must take our focus from God and place it on ourselves. Such actions can only lead to confusion and frustration because the need for an emotional high can only become greater and greater. When we evaluate our worship on the basis of an emotional response, it is only a small step from evaluating the worship service, its leadership and the pastor, himself with the same measure. This generally results in personality focused worship and even idolatry.
Does this mean that there should not be feelings in our worship whatsoever? No, the fruit of the Holy Spirit includes joy and peace, natural results of being controlled by the Spirit of God. Paul admonished the church at Philippi to “rejoice in the Lord always.” Certainly if we have no joy and peace in our walk with the Lord we have room for concern. I believe the danger lies dependance on having a certain level of feelings as the measure of our relationship with God. One of the concerns is that some would attend worship in the sole anticipation of some dramatic moment, when God is longing to speak in a still small voice as He did to Elijah.
What are the danger signs of a misplaced focus? How can we avoid these dangers? I believe that the Lord can guide us into this discernment, if we are open and honest before Him. Some of the” “red flags” to watch for might include the following:
1. Saying that we must have a particular pastor, teacher, song, style of music, etc., before we can really feel like we have worshiped.
2. Describing our worship in terms of how we felt, more than what God is leading us to do.
3. Being more conscious about how we are feeling about the worship service than actively participating and focusing on God.
I’m sure there are many more, but this can give us a starting list of the danger signs. The question remains, How can we avoid this?
1. Strong understanding of what biblical worship is. Grasping from what basis we evaluate base our worship practice.
2. Deliberate preparation for worship.
3. Active focusing on the nature and character of God through thanksgiving and praise.
Perhaps one of the most well known passages on love is found in 1 Corinthians 13:
1 If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
In verses 1-3 we learn that we can do many things, but doing alone does not guarantee love. In verses 4-8a we learn that love is like the nature of God, Himself. The commitment part of love cannot rest without the actions that are in line with the nature and character of God. The power for the commitment of this self-giving motivation can only come from God, Himself. “For God so loved, He gave His only Son....” John 3:16 does not say that God felt so sorry for sinners, or that He was trying to fulfill some need in His being, for God has no needs and does not lack anything. His was a willful commitment to us, without any possibility of return. He did not do it so because it “felt” good.
As believers, we need to be cautious that we reduce love to what we can feel. Feelings are like fruit, sometimes they are there and sometimes they are not. But to say that one must have feelings of that one must have a certain feeling or even a certain level of feelings in order to say that we love, then we have gone beyond the example of Scripture.
Although the two are different, there are some similarities between love and worship that bear bringing to light. Many times there are certain emotions as a result of worship, but those feelings can never be the measure of the depth of our worship, any more than looking only at an apple can tell us the size of the tree from which it fell. Worship, first and foremost is an obedient response to the revealed nature and character of God. There may or may not be a flood of feelings linked to it. Sometimes we are overwhelmed with the absolute awesomeness of a Holy God and other times there is a quiet peace and joy. There may be times that we believe God is there and working, even when we don’t “feel” His presence. He has called us to live by faith, not by feelings.
Reducing worship to a feeling also reverses the focus of worship. The focus of worship is always toward God and God alone. The focus of feelings is inward, personal. By measuring our worship by our feelings we must take our focus from God and place it on ourselves. Such actions can only lead to confusion and frustration because the need for an emotional high can only become greater and greater. When we evaluate our worship on the basis of an emotional response, it is only a small step from evaluating the worship service, its leadership and the pastor, himself with the same measure. This generally results in personality focused worship and even idolatry.
Does this mean that there should not be feelings in our worship whatsoever? No, the fruit of the Holy Spirit includes joy and peace, natural results of being controlled by the Spirit of God. Paul admonished the church at Philippi to “rejoice in the Lord always.” Certainly if we have no joy and peace in our walk with the Lord we have room for concern. I believe the danger lies dependance on having a certain level of feelings as the measure of our relationship with God. One of the concerns is that some would attend worship in the sole anticipation of some dramatic moment, when God is longing to speak in a still small voice as He did to Elijah.
What are the danger signs of a misplaced focus? How can we avoid these dangers? I believe that the Lord can guide us into this discernment, if we are open and honest before Him. Some of the” “red flags” to watch for might include the following:
1. Saying that we must have a particular pastor, teacher, song, style of music, etc., before we can really feel like we have worshiped.
2. Describing our worship in terms of how we felt, more than what God is leading us to do.
3. Being more conscious about how we are feeling about the worship service than actively participating and focusing on God.
I’m sure there are many more, but this can give us a starting list of the danger signs. The question remains, How can we avoid this?
1. Strong understanding of what biblical worship is. Grasping from what basis we evaluate base our worship practice.
2. Deliberate preparation for worship.
3. Active focusing on the nature and character of God through thanksgiving and praise.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Theological Themes in Contemporary Hymnody
[The following is an excerpt from a paper of the same title presented at the Evangelical Theological Society, Nov. 2010, and is based on a study of the theological themes presented from CCLI's list of the most reported songs in use for the past ten years. For a pdf copy of the complete study, you may request through the comment section at the end.]
From the beginnings of the early church, the songs sung in worship have been a reflection of what Christians have believed. The theology expressed through the text of these songs has declared the glories of the Incarnate Christ to the hope of the resurrection of the dead and Christ’s reigning as King of kings at the end of time. Hymnals have long produced a canon of worship songs of collected themes that expressed the beliefs and understandings of the faithful. With the rise of the use of multimedia in worship, the role of a theologically reviewed collection such as a hymnal has been modified so that worship songs made popular by Christian artists find themselves in use in congregational worship without having to go through the theological filters of a review of a hymnal committee before widespread use. What issues does this theological bypassing raise? Are there theological standards for this new growing body of hymnody that flashes across the screens of so many churches?
The texts of the songs in this study will be classified in part by utilizing Susan Wise Bauer’s idea of narrative texts, [“Protestant Hymn, Narrative Theology, and Heresy,” in Wonderful Words of Life: Hymns in American Protestant History and Theology, Richard J. Mouw and Mark A. Noll, eds. ] those centered on the believer’s experience and systematic texts which explore a point of Christian doctrine in a logical manner. Due to the number of texts that are biblical quotations or paraphrases, an additional category, entitled biblical texts, will be added. Some of the texts present a mix of both narrative and systematic elements, making the classification more complicated. In such cases the decision must be made to evaluate in which of the two it receives the most emphasis.
As with any study of this nature, recognition of its limitations and parameters is strategic in the interpretation of data. The study is limited to those texts reported to CCLI by participating congregations. Not all congregations are members of CCLI, the cost of membership is relative to the size of the congregation and no claim is made that every congregation participates in an equal fashion, since the reporting is voluntary. In addition, those texts which are public domain, that is, are no longer under copyright law restrictions, are not included in reporting process. At present there exists no simple way to gather the data from which public domain texts are being used because no similar entity exists to gather such data on the same scale and there is no legal or financial motivation for doing so. No attempt is made to evaluate the music related to the songs. Such work, however valuable, is best reserved for a separate study.
While these limitations are substantial and must not be passed over lightly, CCLI membership in North America and Canada now includes over 200,000 churches. Of this number, 20% are asked to report on a rotating basis every six months. Over the ten and one-half year period this study encompasses, the rotation would have included all participating members and would still represent a substantial number adequate for the present study. No attempt was made to include the use of songs in mass media, such as radio, television or the internet.
The ten-year period of the twenty-five most reported songs potentially could amount to 250 texts; however, due to some songs that remained on the list for more than one year, the study covered a total of sixty-four texts. More will be discussed in the conclusion; however, it must be noted that just because a song has only been on the list two or three times in the past ten years, does not mean that it is not as important, since it may have a recent copyright and thus could not have appeared any earlier. Songs that have repeated appearances obviously have some significance, but one needs be careful into reading too much into the data.
Analysis of the Narrative Texts
Of the sixty-four songs included in the study, forty-three (68%) may be listed as narrative texts, that is, the texts center on the believer’s personal experience, including admonitions to praise God and pleas for divine help. Of these forty-three, nineteen have systematic elements in addition to the personal experience reference. In the following table, the number to the right of the title represents how many times the song appeared in the CCLI listings. The reporting periods are marked in six month intervals for a total of 21 reporting periods, covering a total of ten years and six months. Biblical citations or biblical references within the texts are also notated. [table omitted for lack of space]
One of the above texts reflect hints of a modalistic view of the Trinity, but due to its relative brevity, the observations are not conclusive. In Sondra Corbett’s “I Worship You, Almighty God,” the author addresses “Almighty God” and as well as the “Prince of Peace” as one: “I worship You, Almighty God, There is none like You, I worship You, O Prince of Peace, That is what I want to do.” Generally speaking, but not exclusively, references to Almighty God would refer to the entire Trinity or to God the Father.
Almost half (19) of the narrative texts also have sections that may be described as systematic covering areas of God’s sovereignty, majesty, power, greatness, redemption, while only one has a Trinitarian reference and only one has an eschatological reference. A representative example of God’s sovereignty and character is found in Marc Byrd and Steve Hindalong’s “God of Wonders:” “God of wonders beyond our galaxy, You are holy, holy, The universe declares Your majesty, You are holy, holy, Lord of Heaven and earth.” A Trinitarian reference is made in the second verse of Chris Tomlin, Ed Cash and Jesse Reeves’ “How Great Is Our God:” “The Godhead, Three in One, Father, Spirit, Son.” The older hymn, “How Great Thou Art,” by Stuart Hine found renewed interest in contemporary hymnody because of its attachment to “How Great Is Our God.” This deduction was made by noting Hine’s song did not appear on the list until after the other had gained popularity, most likely because the two were sung as medleys or used together in other ways. “How Great Thou Art” was the only narrative text that dealt with the end times: “When Christ shall come with shout of acclamation and take me home, What joy shall fill my heart.”
Analysis of Systematic Texts
As stated previously, systematic texts are those texts which explore a point of Christian doctrine. Bauer’s original study dealt with metered hymn texts and the systematic presentation of a particular doctrine or doctrines. This study takes some flexibility in her approach due to the more prose nature of the texts and the instructive rather than narrative primary focus of the text. Again, Biblical citations or biblical references within the texts are also notated. [table omitted for lack of space]
The most common theological theme in these thirteen systematic texts (20%) is some aspect of the greatness of God, which is not surprising, since it was the most common among the narrative texts as well. However, there is a wider variety of other themes in addition to God’s greatness, such as the resurrection, eschatology, Christ’s birth, gratitude, the Trinity, atonement, creation, and evangelism. Jennie Lee Riddle’s “Revelation Song” is an example of a text that focuses on the greatness of Christ. In verse three, it is noteworthy that even though it is implied that the person singing is the one filled with wonder, the focus remains more on the character of Christ than the response of the person singing: “Filled with wonder, Awestruck wonder at the mention of Your name. Jesus, Your name is power, Breath and living water, such a marvelous mystery.”
“In Christ Alone” is perhaps the best and most complete example of a systematic text. Keith Getty and Stuart Townend are masterful in making each verse builds to the next and use rich imagery centering around the cross and the redemption story. For example, consider verse three: “There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain. Then bursting forth in glorious day up from the grave He rose again. And as He stands in victory, sin’s curse has lost its grip on me, for I am His and He is mine, bought with the precious blood of Christ.” A simple yet effective Trinitarian text is found in Donna Adkins’ “Glorify Thy Name.” In typical Trinitarian structure, each verse begins with one member of the Trinity with a statement of worship and adoration, then end with a complementary doxology: “Father, we love You, We worship and adore You, Glorify Thy Name in all the earth. Glorify Thy name, glorify Thy name, glorify Thy name in all the earth.”
The themes of evangelism and eschatology are not common in these texts. Graham Kendrick’s “Shine, Jesus, Shine” centers around the reoccurring theme of sharing the Good News around the world in the refrain: “Shine, Jesus, shine, fill this land with the Father’s glory. Blaze, Spirit, Blaze, set our hearts on fire. Flow, river, flow, flood the nations with grace and mercy, send forth Your word, Lord, and let there be light.” In Robin Mark’s, “Days of Elijah,” there is a blending of various scriptural allusions to convey its eschatological message. Here’s an example from the refrain: “Behold He comes riding on the clouds, shining like the sun at the trumpet call. So lift your voice, it’s the year of Jubilee, and out of Zion’s hill Salvation comes.”
One of the systematic texts above reflects hints of modalism. In the verses of Rich Mullin’s “Awesome God,” the text mentions how God evicted Adam and Eve out of the Garden and then in the next line addresses the same “He” as the one dying on the cross: “Our God is an awesome God, And the Lord wasn’t joking When He kicked ‘em out of Eden, It wasn’t for no reason That He shed His blood.” A similar section is found in the second verse: “Judgment and wrath He poured out on Sodom, Mercy and grace He gave us at the cross.” The use of personal pronouns in English adds to the blurring of the understanding of who is responsible for the actions.
Analysis of Biblical Texts
The remaining eight texts (12%) fall in to a category that Bauer did not have, that of texts that were essentially quotations from Scripture. One characteristic of some of the contemporary genre is a musical setting of Scripture that is not restructured by metrical limits. One might call this type of song a new psalmody, harkening back to the days of the psalters. [table omitted for lack of space]
Some of the texts are direct quotes from the Scripture, such as Laurie Klein’s “I Will Call Upon the Lord (Ps. 18:3, 46):” “I will call upon the Lord who is worthy to be praised, so shall I be saved from my enemies.” Others paraphrase portions of Scripture, as in Naida Hearn’s “Jesus, Name Above All Names:” Jesus, name above all names, beautiful Savior, glorious Lord, Emmanuel, God is with us, blessed Redeemer, living Word.”
Conclusion
Given the limitations previously stated, that is, the lack of hard data as to what songs in public domain are being used in the churches that participate in the surveyed reports, and the fact that although there are substantial numbers of congregations that do participate in the CCLI, the results are representative, at best. What can be said about the most often used songs over the past ten years? Beginning comments must underscore that the song of the church is alive and well, it is not stagnant, and it continues to grow. To start anywhere else misses the point that the church has an unquenchable desire to worship and to do so with a new song. Another matter of rejoicing relates to the growth in the public expression of the worship of the nature and character of God. It is difficult to remember when the focus of worshiping God in all his attributes has become as important as it is now.
Along with the good news are some concerns. The variety of the theological themes being sung is very narrow. The CCLI reporting process only allows for the top twenty-five songs, so it is possible that other songs were being used; however concern must be expressed for the lack of some major themes that seem to be lacking. The limited number of theological themes may reflect a shallowness in the theology of the authors, or weakness in the ability to articulate more encompassing theological truth. For example, only two songs with an evangelistic missions theme made the list, only four even mention the Holy Spirit, only two have some focus on God’s Word and some themes are not represented at all, such as the church as the Body of Christ, and judgment.
The majority [68%] of the texts are narrative, that is, the focus is personal experience, even with those texts which contain systematic elements. At times, one might consider some of the texts too internally focused. For example, consider the lines from the following texts: “You took the fall and thought of me, above all” [Above All]. The purpose of the atonement was not just for one person, but to appease the wrath of God, which resulted in pardon for all those who would respond to God’s grace. Sometimes in corporate worship, the personal pronoun “I” or “my” is used in a communal sense, more than just a personal experience. However, care must be taken with those texts that are designed for corporate worship that the expressions used are experiences common to all believers, and not just the personal experience of an individual.
The central focus and goal of the text must be consistent. Consider the following: “All hail King Jesus, all hail Emmanuel, King of kings and Lord of Lords, Bright Morning Star, and for all eternity I’m going to praise Him, and forevermore I will reign with Him” [All Hail King Jesus]. The song moves from praising Christ to a climax that rejoices in a position of personal power. Another one of the texts might easily be taken as a popular love song: “And I, I’m desperate for You” [Breathe]. The focus could easily be interpreted more on personal desperation, than fulfillment in Christ.
While repetition in and of itself in not uncommon even among the Gospel song tradition, too much repetition of personal pronouns may be problematic: “I am a friend of God, I am a friend of God, I am a friend of God, He calls me friend” [Friend of God]. Some confusion lies here with the personal emphasis. As Kimbrough reminds the reader, “the singing of hymns and spiritual songs should not be a manipulative process for the self-edification of worshipers.”[Kimbrough, The Lyrical Theology of Charles Wesley: A Reader] The goal of corporate worship is the adoration and glorification of God. Even though corporate worship ministers to the individual participant, the goal of worship must not deteriorate to seeking God for the personal self fulfillment.
While it is desirable and necessary that new authors and composers rise up to fill the needs of their generation’s expression of worship, the need for sound doctrine is just as great. Worship leaders must become sufficiently adept in theology to recognize doctrinal weaknesses and how to correct the textual issues, or when to refrain from using a text entirely. With the new song we need not fall into the trap that C. S. Lewis called “chronological snobbery,” thinking that only the newest is the best and worthy of use. Balance is needed, balance in the use of older text and new, and balance in covering all of what is believed, lest a generation is raised having never heard the entirety of the great doctrines of the faith expressed in sung texts.
In addition to balance, deliverance from chronological snobbery, and modalistic confusions about the Trinity, care must be taken that the universalism of postmodern thought not be allowed to pass through the theological filters for congregational song. The postmodern cries that the only reality that exists is that which the individual creates for himself or for herself might easily find itself in worship proclaiming its message of the absence of absolute truth. Focus must be continually given to texts that are well written, well chosen and appropriate for the context presented and well executed in order to communicate biblical truth shared as a part of worship in the most effective manner possible. The Apostle Paul reminds us that we need to “sing with the spirit, and sing with the understanding also” (I Cor. 14:15).
From the beginnings of the early church, the songs sung in worship have been a reflection of what Christians have believed. The theology expressed through the text of these songs has declared the glories of the Incarnate Christ to the hope of the resurrection of the dead and Christ’s reigning as King of kings at the end of time. Hymnals have long produced a canon of worship songs of collected themes that expressed the beliefs and understandings of the faithful. With the rise of the use of multimedia in worship, the role of a theologically reviewed collection such as a hymnal has been modified so that worship songs made popular by Christian artists find themselves in use in congregational worship without having to go through the theological filters of a review of a hymnal committee before widespread use. What issues does this theological bypassing raise? Are there theological standards for this new growing body of hymnody that flashes across the screens of so many churches?
The texts of the songs in this study will be classified in part by utilizing Susan Wise Bauer’s idea of narrative texts, [“Protestant Hymn, Narrative Theology, and Heresy,” in Wonderful Words of Life: Hymns in American Protestant History and Theology, Richard J. Mouw and Mark A. Noll, eds. ] those centered on the believer’s experience and systematic texts which explore a point of Christian doctrine in a logical manner. Due to the number of texts that are biblical quotations or paraphrases, an additional category, entitled biblical texts, will be added. Some of the texts present a mix of both narrative and systematic elements, making the classification more complicated. In such cases the decision must be made to evaluate in which of the two it receives the most emphasis.
As with any study of this nature, recognition of its limitations and parameters is strategic in the interpretation of data. The study is limited to those texts reported to CCLI by participating congregations. Not all congregations are members of CCLI, the cost of membership is relative to the size of the congregation and no claim is made that every congregation participates in an equal fashion, since the reporting is voluntary. In addition, those texts which are public domain, that is, are no longer under copyright law restrictions, are not included in reporting process. At present there exists no simple way to gather the data from which public domain texts are being used because no similar entity exists to gather such data on the same scale and there is no legal or financial motivation for doing so. No attempt is made to evaluate the music related to the songs. Such work, however valuable, is best reserved for a separate study.
While these limitations are substantial and must not be passed over lightly, CCLI membership in North America and Canada now includes over 200,000 churches. Of this number, 20% are asked to report on a rotating basis every six months. Over the ten and one-half year period this study encompasses, the rotation would have included all participating members and would still represent a substantial number adequate for the present study. No attempt was made to include the use of songs in mass media, such as radio, television or the internet.
The ten-year period of the twenty-five most reported songs potentially could amount to 250 texts; however, due to some songs that remained on the list for more than one year, the study covered a total of sixty-four texts. More will be discussed in the conclusion; however, it must be noted that just because a song has only been on the list two or three times in the past ten years, does not mean that it is not as important, since it may have a recent copyright and thus could not have appeared any earlier. Songs that have repeated appearances obviously have some significance, but one needs be careful into reading too much into the data.
Analysis of the Narrative Texts
Of the sixty-four songs included in the study, forty-three (68%) may be listed as narrative texts, that is, the texts center on the believer’s personal experience, including admonitions to praise God and pleas for divine help. Of these forty-three, nineteen have systematic elements in addition to the personal experience reference. In the following table, the number to the right of the title represents how many times the song appeared in the CCLI listings. The reporting periods are marked in six month intervals for a total of 21 reporting periods, covering a total of ten years and six months. Biblical citations or biblical references within the texts are also notated. [table omitted for lack of space]
One of the above texts reflect hints of a modalistic view of the Trinity, but due to its relative brevity, the observations are not conclusive. In Sondra Corbett’s “I Worship You, Almighty God,” the author addresses “Almighty God” and as well as the “Prince of Peace” as one: “I worship You, Almighty God, There is none like You, I worship You, O Prince of Peace, That is what I want to do.” Generally speaking, but not exclusively, references to Almighty God would refer to the entire Trinity or to God the Father.
Almost half (19) of the narrative texts also have sections that may be described as systematic covering areas of God’s sovereignty, majesty, power, greatness, redemption, while only one has a Trinitarian reference and only one has an eschatological reference. A representative example of God’s sovereignty and character is found in Marc Byrd and Steve Hindalong’s “God of Wonders:” “God of wonders beyond our galaxy, You are holy, holy, The universe declares Your majesty, You are holy, holy, Lord of Heaven and earth.” A Trinitarian reference is made in the second verse of Chris Tomlin, Ed Cash and Jesse Reeves’ “How Great Is Our God:” “The Godhead, Three in One, Father, Spirit, Son.” The older hymn, “How Great Thou Art,” by Stuart Hine found renewed interest in contemporary hymnody because of its attachment to “How Great Is Our God.” This deduction was made by noting Hine’s song did not appear on the list until after the other had gained popularity, most likely because the two were sung as medleys or used together in other ways. “How Great Thou Art” was the only narrative text that dealt with the end times: “When Christ shall come with shout of acclamation and take me home, What joy shall fill my heart.”
Analysis of Systematic Texts
As stated previously, systematic texts are those texts which explore a point of Christian doctrine. Bauer’s original study dealt with metered hymn texts and the systematic presentation of a particular doctrine or doctrines. This study takes some flexibility in her approach due to the more prose nature of the texts and the instructive rather than narrative primary focus of the text. Again, Biblical citations or biblical references within the texts are also notated. [table omitted for lack of space]
The most common theological theme in these thirteen systematic texts (20%) is some aspect of the greatness of God, which is not surprising, since it was the most common among the narrative texts as well. However, there is a wider variety of other themes in addition to God’s greatness, such as the resurrection, eschatology, Christ’s birth, gratitude, the Trinity, atonement, creation, and evangelism. Jennie Lee Riddle’s “Revelation Song” is an example of a text that focuses on the greatness of Christ. In verse three, it is noteworthy that even though it is implied that the person singing is the one filled with wonder, the focus remains more on the character of Christ than the response of the person singing: “Filled with wonder, Awestruck wonder at the mention of Your name. Jesus, Your name is power, Breath and living water, such a marvelous mystery.”
“In Christ Alone” is perhaps the best and most complete example of a systematic text. Keith Getty and Stuart Townend are masterful in making each verse builds to the next and use rich imagery centering around the cross and the redemption story. For example, consider verse three: “There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain. Then bursting forth in glorious day up from the grave He rose again. And as He stands in victory, sin’s curse has lost its grip on me, for I am His and He is mine, bought with the precious blood of Christ.” A simple yet effective Trinitarian text is found in Donna Adkins’ “Glorify Thy Name.” In typical Trinitarian structure, each verse begins with one member of the Trinity with a statement of worship and adoration, then end with a complementary doxology: “Father, we love You, We worship and adore You, Glorify Thy Name in all the earth. Glorify Thy name, glorify Thy name, glorify Thy name in all the earth.”
The themes of evangelism and eschatology are not common in these texts. Graham Kendrick’s “Shine, Jesus, Shine” centers around the reoccurring theme of sharing the Good News around the world in the refrain: “Shine, Jesus, shine, fill this land with the Father’s glory. Blaze, Spirit, Blaze, set our hearts on fire. Flow, river, flow, flood the nations with grace and mercy, send forth Your word, Lord, and let there be light.” In Robin Mark’s, “Days of Elijah,” there is a blending of various scriptural allusions to convey its eschatological message. Here’s an example from the refrain: “Behold He comes riding on the clouds, shining like the sun at the trumpet call. So lift your voice, it’s the year of Jubilee, and out of Zion’s hill Salvation comes.”
One of the systematic texts above reflects hints of modalism. In the verses of Rich Mullin’s “Awesome God,” the text mentions how God evicted Adam and Eve out of the Garden and then in the next line addresses the same “He” as the one dying on the cross: “Our God is an awesome God, And the Lord wasn’t joking When He kicked ‘em out of Eden, It wasn’t for no reason That He shed His blood.” A similar section is found in the second verse: “Judgment and wrath He poured out on Sodom, Mercy and grace He gave us at the cross.” The use of personal pronouns in English adds to the blurring of the understanding of who is responsible for the actions.
Analysis of Biblical Texts
The remaining eight texts (12%) fall in to a category that Bauer did not have, that of texts that were essentially quotations from Scripture. One characteristic of some of the contemporary genre is a musical setting of Scripture that is not restructured by metrical limits. One might call this type of song a new psalmody, harkening back to the days of the psalters. [table omitted for lack of space]
Some of the texts are direct quotes from the Scripture, such as Laurie Klein’s “I Will Call Upon the Lord (Ps. 18:3, 46):” “I will call upon the Lord who is worthy to be praised, so shall I be saved from my enemies.” Others paraphrase portions of Scripture, as in Naida Hearn’s “Jesus, Name Above All Names:” Jesus, name above all names, beautiful Savior, glorious Lord, Emmanuel, God is with us, blessed Redeemer, living Word.”
Conclusion
Given the limitations previously stated, that is, the lack of hard data as to what songs in public domain are being used in the churches that participate in the surveyed reports, and the fact that although there are substantial numbers of congregations that do participate in the CCLI, the results are representative, at best. What can be said about the most often used songs over the past ten years? Beginning comments must underscore that the song of the church is alive and well, it is not stagnant, and it continues to grow. To start anywhere else misses the point that the church has an unquenchable desire to worship and to do so with a new song. Another matter of rejoicing relates to the growth in the public expression of the worship of the nature and character of God. It is difficult to remember when the focus of worshiping God in all his attributes has become as important as it is now.
Along with the good news are some concerns. The variety of the theological themes being sung is very narrow. The CCLI reporting process only allows for the top twenty-five songs, so it is possible that other songs were being used; however concern must be expressed for the lack of some major themes that seem to be lacking. The limited number of theological themes may reflect a shallowness in the theology of the authors, or weakness in the ability to articulate more encompassing theological truth. For example, only two songs with an evangelistic missions theme made the list, only four even mention the Holy Spirit, only two have some focus on God’s Word and some themes are not represented at all, such as the church as the Body of Christ, and judgment.
The majority [68%] of the texts are narrative, that is, the focus is personal experience, even with those texts which contain systematic elements. At times, one might consider some of the texts too internally focused. For example, consider the lines from the following texts: “You took the fall and thought of me, above all” [Above All]. The purpose of the atonement was not just for one person, but to appease the wrath of God, which resulted in pardon for all those who would respond to God’s grace. Sometimes in corporate worship, the personal pronoun “I” or “my” is used in a communal sense, more than just a personal experience. However, care must be taken with those texts that are designed for corporate worship that the expressions used are experiences common to all believers, and not just the personal experience of an individual.
The central focus and goal of the text must be consistent. Consider the following: “All hail King Jesus, all hail Emmanuel, King of kings and Lord of Lords, Bright Morning Star, and for all eternity I’m going to praise Him, and forevermore I will reign with Him” [All Hail King Jesus]. The song moves from praising Christ to a climax that rejoices in a position of personal power. Another one of the texts might easily be taken as a popular love song: “And I, I’m desperate for You” [Breathe]. The focus could easily be interpreted more on personal desperation, than fulfillment in Christ.
While repetition in and of itself in not uncommon even among the Gospel song tradition, too much repetition of personal pronouns may be problematic: “I am a friend of God, I am a friend of God, I am a friend of God, He calls me friend” [Friend of God]. Some confusion lies here with the personal emphasis. As Kimbrough reminds the reader, “the singing of hymns and spiritual songs should not be a manipulative process for the self-edification of worshipers.”[Kimbrough, The Lyrical Theology of Charles Wesley: A Reader] The goal of corporate worship is the adoration and glorification of God. Even though corporate worship ministers to the individual participant, the goal of worship must not deteriorate to seeking God for the personal self fulfillment.
While it is desirable and necessary that new authors and composers rise up to fill the needs of their generation’s expression of worship, the need for sound doctrine is just as great. Worship leaders must become sufficiently adept in theology to recognize doctrinal weaknesses and how to correct the textual issues, or when to refrain from using a text entirely. With the new song we need not fall into the trap that C. S. Lewis called “chronological snobbery,” thinking that only the newest is the best and worthy of use. Balance is needed, balance in the use of older text and new, and balance in covering all of what is believed, lest a generation is raised having never heard the entirety of the great doctrines of the faith expressed in sung texts.
In addition to balance, deliverance from chronological snobbery, and modalistic confusions about the Trinity, care must be taken that the universalism of postmodern thought not be allowed to pass through the theological filters for congregational song. The postmodern cries that the only reality that exists is that which the individual creates for himself or for herself might easily find itself in worship proclaiming its message of the absence of absolute truth. Focus must be continually given to texts that are well written, well chosen and appropriate for the context presented and well executed in order to communicate biblical truth shared as a part of worship in the most effective manner possible. The Apostle Paul reminds us that we need to “sing with the spirit, and sing with the understanding also” (I Cor. 14:15).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)