Praise ye Jehovah!
Praise God in His sanctuary:
Praise Him in the firmament of His power.
Praise Him for His mighty acts:
Praise Him according to His excellent greatness.
Praise Him with trumpet sound:
Praise His with psaltery and harp.
Praise Him with timbrel and dance:
Praise Him with stringed instruments and pipe.
Praise Him with loud cymbals:
Praise Him with l1igh sounding cymbals.
Let everything that hath breath, praise Jehovah.
Praise Jehovah!
–Psalm 150
The words of the psalmist are joyful in the praise of Jehovah, and he is very free in his use of music for this purpose. Yet, how many church members of today could put up with the din that he describes, and call it worship? This brings us to the source of a very difficult problem in the church today, the question whether music in worship causes edification or offense. There is more than one congregation in which the area of music has been labeled “the war department.” Why is it that a vehicle that is so capable of bringing highest praises to our God should be a cause of so much stumbling?
Let us establish from the beginning that we are not questioning the sincerity of either the church musician or the church member. Each of them is expressing what he feels is the most fitting way of giving praise to God. Nor are we interested in judging the musician who obviously has not had the training to be competent as a church musician. We are beginning with the assumption that there is an average congregation and a capable musician.
However, our starting paint does not begin with the organist playing his music in the church service, The conflict has begun long before. A person enters church already thoroughly conditioned as far as his musical tastes are concerned. This conditioning has involved an interesting combination of several different sources. There is the music that he has been used to hearing in church services since childhood; and the music that he has learned while attending school, as well as the attitude of his parents and peers to that music. Each of these sources contributes its bits and pieces to the complex shadings of a person’s musical taste.
It is also amazing that music has such a powerful unconscious effect upon us. An evidence of this is the way a “catchy” beer-commercial-tune will pop up in your mind in the middle or the day. You were not even aware that you were listening, and you certainly weren’t interested in the product; but, there it is causing your foot to tap out its rhythm. This is only one proof of the unconscious effect that music has had upon us. Add to this the saccharin-sweet “mush” that is played as interlude and background music on the afternoon “soap operas”; and the FM stations that feature nebulous-nice-sweet -sounds which ooze through your home so that you may work with a cloud under your feet and breeze through the day on a pillow of ease; and you have an idea of the several unconscious influences which contribute to the various tastes in church music.
From this, some feel that the so-called gospel song is the most sincere and best vehicle of worship. For others, it is very close to blasphemy. Even in the area of those “tuned in” to the more sophisticated forms of music, there is great difference of opinion. Some feel that the only fitting music for worship is the Baroque. Some feel that this is meaningless, and that the sacred music of the Romantic period carries a clearer message. Still others feel that this music is shallow, and that our contemporary music is the vehicle to be used to speak to our generation.
Realizing the number of different musical tastes in a congregation, you can begin to calculate the potential for edification and offense. But an already complicated problem is compounded by the fact that a person’s approach to music is generally not a mental one, but an emotional one. Musicians have a reputation for being temperamental (as any elder called upon to correct an erring organist can testify). However, “temperamentalism” is not only true of the musician it is also true of the listener. We do not approach the sound of the organ prelude in church with a cool, analytical mind; we approach it with an emotional response: “I like it,” or “I can’t stand to listen to that.” This is a judgment that is not subject to alteration or modification easily. Instead it becomes a battle cry.
Taking all of these various factors into consideration, it is not surprising that music should be the “war department” in the church; the surprise is that the warfare is not greater! It is obvious that there must be a measure of give-and-take between the musician and the member. The probability that the music played will exactly At the musical taste of a given individual is very small. Is it possible for some, then, to stoop in order to raise others, and still be able to worship? On the other hand, is it possible for others to stretch in listening to music which is beyond them, and at the same time be able to worship sincerely?
The question is this: “Is peace possible?” Because of the importance of music in our worship service, we should certainly hope so. In attempting to find it, we admit the difficulty in overcoming an emotional situation with a mental, analytical approach, but it is the only tool at our disposal.
We might begin by attempting to analyze the source of offense in the music of the church. It can he found in several factors, once again. When the offense is committed, it is usually the musician who is blamed. Since we assume in this article that the musician is one trained and capable in his field, the complaints will generally be that the people do not understand the music being performed. This does not mean, however, that the musician is wrong for not stooping to the level of the people. What is it that has made up the level of understanding of the people, and shouldn’t they understand their need to be raised to a higher level in their adoration of the most high God?
The average level of understanding in music comes from the collection of sources mentioned at the beginning of this article, and it seems that the music of the so-called “sacred music” stations on the radio represents that level of understanding for the average person. This is a collection of choruses and hymns “with lots of hooplah” (as one avid listener put it), with a little roller skating music thrown in for good. measure, all under the general title of “sacred.” The fact is, that the unconscious influences are beginning to show themselves. Hearing a rock ‘n roll beat to a secular song makes us throb to the rhythm. We don’t listen to the words, but we know that this is worldly. However, if we can slip in a religious title, have the same beat, and the words almost as unintel1igible, we can console our consciences and call it sacred. Al Richman of the Sunshine Boys is entirely unabashed in speaking of his worldly goals:
“Let’s face it, we believe that anybody who has paid his buck should be entertained. They like this kind of (religious) music, and we give it to them. Some people say we deal in ‘corn.’ Maybe we do, but we know what our audience wants.”
Musically, there is no distinction between sacred and secular. The origin of such music is clearly that of the world, not of the church. It is inspired by a hypnotic beat, not the love of God. The sentimental “blues-style” of other popular hymns is equally secular in its inspiration; and its words arc usually theologically poor.
It can be seriously questioned, therefore, whether such a level of understanding should be allowed to enter the worship service at all! If there is room in an individual’s life for this type of music, he cannot expect that this will be presented as our highest offering to God of our worship and praise!
Another source of offense is the misunderstanding of the members of the congregation concerning the purpose of the music in the church. Church music is NOT intended to lull the worshipper into a meditative stupor, and then serve as pleasant background to be listened to with half attention while admiring new hats and uneven hemlines, or ignoring it altogether. Tn the same area, the choir anthem is not a five-minute “break” for entertainment. Rather, the music should be directed to a specific purpose. There are several things which make up the direction that the music will take in each service. There is the season of the year, and obviously more specific, the subject of the message. The presentation of the Word gives a focus to the entire service. If the music would definitely point to that focus, deal with the special emphasis of the season, or prompt the proper thoughts that one should have at the time of the presentation of our offerings, how much more meaningful the worshipping could be!
Up to this time, the offenses have been created by the church member. It is only fair to look at the other side of the picture. Let us be honest, the musician can be just as unwilling to have an open mind as the member in the pew.
Remember, fellow musicians, the worship service must reflect the glory of God in all of the activities. You may be able to play a very complicated Bach chorale-prelude and be blessed tremendously; whereas, for the member in the pew, it may as well have been the Toccata and Fugue in d minor, which we’re all agreed is not the most suitable church music. The service is for mutual edification, not a course with a captive audience in music appreciation. Your musicianship is not ONLY shown in the technical aspect of your organ music, but it is abundantly evident in the care and delicacy with which you would perform the very simplest hymn or hymn-prelude. There is night and day difference in the performance of a trained musician playing Seth Bingham’s Hymn Prelude on Toplady (“Rock of Ages”), and the same composition being played by a person who has barely learned the rudiments of organ playing. The first would serve to edify the simplest soul, and the latter would sound as if the notes were totally unrelated to each other. Your musicianship makes it music, and the congregation doesn’t feel, then, that it is being concertized away from intelligent worship. In the same area, give in, once in a while, and play a simple hymn—not the favorites that don’t reflect the words that are expressed, but are enjoyed because of their sentimental harmonies; but the truly great hymns that would thrill both the simplest and the most sophisticated tastes in music, played in a very plain manner. This is what the member in the pew wants as something that he feels is on his level, and it takes a very competent musician to play a hymn well.
How, then, does music serve the church? It serves as a vehicle of grace and is another way for man to talk about God and the wonders He has performed. If, as was previously mentioned, we expect that the church member is going to have an open attitude concerning the music, and is going to try to see that the music does carry out a specific directive, how is he going to know the sentiments of the piece being performed if it is unfamiliar to him? The titles of the numbers being used for the prelude and offertory MUST be included in the bulletin. (The postlude might just as well be eliminated altogether. No one listens to it, anyway.) These titles are very enlightening, and very clearly give the message of the piece in a “nutshell.” However, there are congregations that are concerned enough about the music being played that they feel that the title is not sufficient information: so an insert for the bulletin is prepared each week which presents the verse in full which is most appropriate to the occasion or the pastor’s message. Also, this insert has the words of the choir anthem, and includes a rather substantial outline of the sermon. For those in the congregation who are really conscientious and concerned about the centering of their thoughts during the different sections of the service, this has proved to be a great help. Of course, there are those who feel that it is a total “waste of time.” But there is so much meaningful music contained in organ literature, which has such rich spiritual content and is very appropriate to the tone of the service as dictated by the sermon topic; must we completely ignore it because John Vander Doe never has had the opportunity to be exposed to any other music but the same hymns sung week after week in his church?
In conclusion, let me say that there is a foreseeable truce in this previously unsolvable problem. Our children are being exposed to truly great hymnody in the two song books that the National Union of Christian Schools has published: The Children’s Hymnbook and Hymns for Youth. It is appalling, however, the number of parents that criticize these hymnbooks because they do not contain the rollicking “choruses” that the children used to learn. The example comes to mind of a kindergarten teacher whose favorite song was “Zion Founded on the Mountain,” and that was the first song that her little cherubs had to learn. You can imagine what they did with the words, but the tune was shouted from the rafters, enjoyed by the children because it was “such a jumpy tune.” No thought was given to the fact that this kind of singing (?) ruins the young voice. How much better a song like “Who Made Ocean, Earth, and Sky?”—a song that can be used for any age. If the children are too young to comprehend the question, then let them sing the answer—“God our loving Father!” after the teacher has sung the question. This type of worshipful music the children love, and they sing it wholeheartedly, but it doesn’t lend itself to that horrible shouting that some teachers and parents call singing!
Let us rejoice with our children that they are being exposed to truly great hymnody, and learning to like it. Just because it sounds strange and unfamiliar to your ears, don’t discount it as no good. Remember that in all areas of our education, our standards are being raised to new heights every year. Children are learning in the sixth grade the things that were taught in the high schools only a decade ago. The same strides are being made in the field of music.
Don’t have the mental attitude, “I know what I like, don’t bother me with the facts.” You would accept an expert’s opinion in any other area where you felt a deficiency in knowledge. Why, in the field of music, does everyone feel that he is an authority? Try to change a person’s mind concerning what he feels and what stirs him, and you’ve got an impossible task on your hands. The secret is in the attitude of the individual. If he is willing to see another viewpoint, half the victory is won, the goal being his own edification.
If there is an amount of give and take on the part of the church member, and an attitude on the part of the musician to try to help the church member, and play TO him, not AT him, there should be no reason for the distinction between “edifying and offensive” in church music. All are working together for the mutual praise, adoration, and worship of God with our highest offerings!
Mrs. Wenda De Vries is the wife of Rev. James De Vries, pastor of the Haven Christian Reformed Church, Zeeland, Michigan.
Praise God in His sanctuary:
Praise Him in the firmament of His power.
Praise Him for His mighty acts:
Praise Him according to His excellent greatness.
Praise Him with trumpet sound:
Praise His with psaltery and harp.
Praise Him with timbrel and dance:
Praise Him with stringed instruments and pipe.
Praise Him with loud cymbals:
Praise Him with l1igh sounding cymbals.
Let everything that hath breath, praise Jehovah.
Praise Jehovah!
–Psalm 150
The words of the psalmist are joyful in the praise of Jehovah, and he is very free in his use of music for this purpose. Yet, how many church members of today could put up with the din that he describes, and call it worship? This brings us to the source of a very difficult problem in the church today, the question whether music in worship causes edification or offense. There is more than one congregation in which the area of music has been labeled “the war department.” Why is it that a vehicle that is so capable of bringing highest praises to our God should be a cause of so much stumbling?
Let us establish from the beginning that we are not questioning the sincerity of either the church musician or the church member. Each of them is expressing what he feels is the most fitting way of giving praise to God. Nor are we interested in judging the musician who obviously has not had the training to be competent as a church musician. We are beginning with the assumption that there is an average congregation and a capable musician.
However, our starting paint does not begin with the organist playing his music in the church service, The conflict has begun long before. A person enters church already thoroughly conditioned as far as his musical tastes are concerned. This conditioning has involved an interesting combination of several different sources. There is the music that he has been used to hearing in church services since childhood; and the music that he has learned while attending school, as well as the attitude of his parents and peers to that music. Each of these sources contributes its bits and pieces to the complex shadings of a person’s musical taste.
It is also amazing that music has such a powerful unconscious effect upon us. An evidence of this is the way a “catchy” beer-commercial-tune will pop up in your mind in the middle or the day. You were not even aware that you were listening, and you certainly weren’t interested in the product; but, there it is causing your foot to tap out its rhythm. This is only one proof of the unconscious effect that music has had upon us. Add to this the saccharin-sweet “mush” that is played as interlude and background music on the afternoon “soap operas”; and the FM stations that feature nebulous-nice-sweet -sounds which ooze through your home so that you may work with a cloud under your feet and breeze through the day on a pillow of ease; and you have an idea of the several unconscious influences which contribute to the various tastes in church music.
From this, some feel that the so-called gospel song is the most sincere and best vehicle of worship. For others, it is very close to blasphemy. Even in the area of those “tuned in” to the more sophisticated forms of music, there is great difference of opinion. Some feel that the only fitting music for worship is the Baroque. Some feel that this is meaningless, and that the sacred music of the Romantic period carries a clearer message. Still others feel that this music is shallow, and that our contemporary music is the vehicle to be used to speak to our generation.
Realizing the number of different musical tastes in a congregation, you can begin to calculate the potential for edification and offense. But an already complicated problem is compounded by the fact that a person’s approach to music is generally not a mental one, but an emotional one. Musicians have a reputation for being temperamental (as any elder called upon to correct an erring organist can testify). However, “temperamentalism” is not only true of the musician it is also true of the listener. We do not approach the sound of the organ prelude in church with a cool, analytical mind; we approach it with an emotional response: “I like it,” or “I can’t stand to listen to that.” This is a judgment that is not subject to alteration or modification easily. Instead it becomes a battle cry.
Taking all of these various factors into consideration, it is not surprising that music should be the “war department” in the church; the surprise is that the warfare is not greater! It is obvious that there must be a measure of give-and-take between the musician and the member. The probability that the music played will exactly At the musical taste of a given individual is very small. Is it possible for some, then, to stoop in order to raise others, and still be able to worship? On the other hand, is it possible for others to stretch in listening to music which is beyond them, and at the same time be able to worship sincerely?
The question is this: “Is peace possible?” Because of the importance of music in our worship service, we should certainly hope so. In attempting to find it, we admit the difficulty in overcoming an emotional situation with a mental, analytical approach, but it is the only tool at our disposal.
We might begin by attempting to analyze the source of offense in the music of the church. It can he found in several factors, once again. When the offense is committed, it is usually the musician who is blamed. Since we assume in this article that the musician is one trained and capable in his field, the complaints will generally be that the people do not understand the music being performed. This does not mean, however, that the musician is wrong for not stooping to the level of the people. What is it that has made up the level of understanding of the people, and shouldn’t they understand their need to be raised to a higher level in their adoration of the most high God?
The average level of understanding in music comes from the collection of sources mentioned at the beginning of this article, and it seems that the music of the so-called “sacred music” stations on the radio represents that level of understanding for the average person. This is a collection of choruses and hymns “with lots of hooplah” (as one avid listener put it), with a little roller skating music thrown in for good. measure, all under the general title of “sacred.” The fact is, that the unconscious influences are beginning to show themselves. Hearing a rock ‘n roll beat to a secular song makes us throb to the rhythm. We don’t listen to the words, but we know that this is worldly. However, if we can slip in a religious title, have the same beat, and the words almost as unintel1igible, we can console our consciences and call it sacred. Al Richman of the Sunshine Boys is entirely unabashed in speaking of his worldly goals:
“Let’s face it, we believe that anybody who has paid his buck should be entertained. They like this kind of (religious) music, and we give it to them. Some people say we deal in ‘corn.’ Maybe we do, but we know what our audience wants.”
Musically, there is no distinction between sacred and secular. The origin of such music is clearly that of the world, not of the church. It is inspired by a hypnotic beat, not the love of God. The sentimental “blues-style” of other popular hymns is equally secular in its inspiration; and its words arc usually theologically poor.
It can be seriously questioned, therefore, whether such a level of understanding should be allowed to enter the worship service at all! If there is room in an individual’s life for this type of music, he cannot expect that this will be presented as our highest offering to God of our worship and praise!
Another source of offense is the misunderstanding of the members of the congregation concerning the purpose of the music in the church. Church music is NOT intended to lull the worshipper into a meditative stupor, and then serve as pleasant background to be listened to with half attention while admiring new hats and uneven hemlines, or ignoring it altogether. Tn the same area, the choir anthem is not a five-minute “break” for entertainment. Rather, the music should be directed to a specific purpose. There are several things which make up the direction that the music will take in each service. There is the season of the year, and obviously more specific, the subject of the message. The presentation of the Word gives a focus to the entire service. If the music would definitely point to that focus, deal with the special emphasis of the season, or prompt the proper thoughts that one should have at the time of the presentation of our offerings, how much more meaningful the worshipping could be!
Up to this time, the offenses have been created by the church member. It is only fair to look at the other side of the picture. Let us be honest, the musician can be just as unwilling to have an open mind as the member in the pew.
Remember, fellow musicians, the worship service must reflect the glory of God in all of the activities. You may be able to play a very complicated Bach chorale-prelude and be blessed tremendously; whereas, for the member in the pew, it may as well have been the Toccata and Fugue in d minor, which we’re all agreed is not the most suitable church music. The service is for mutual edification, not a course with a captive audience in music appreciation. Your musicianship is not ONLY shown in the technical aspect of your organ music, but it is abundantly evident in the care and delicacy with which you would perform the very simplest hymn or hymn-prelude. There is night and day difference in the performance of a trained musician playing Seth Bingham’s Hymn Prelude on Toplady (“Rock of Ages”), and the same composition being played by a person who has barely learned the rudiments of organ playing. The first would serve to edify the simplest soul, and the latter would sound as if the notes were totally unrelated to each other. Your musicianship makes it music, and the congregation doesn’t feel, then, that it is being concertized away from intelligent worship. In the same area, give in, once in a while, and play a simple hymn—not the favorites that don’t reflect the words that are expressed, but are enjoyed because of their sentimental harmonies; but the truly great hymns that would thrill both the simplest and the most sophisticated tastes in music, played in a very plain manner. This is what the member in the pew wants as something that he feels is on his level, and it takes a very competent musician to play a hymn well.
How, then, does music serve the church? It serves as a vehicle of grace and is another way for man to talk about God and the wonders He has performed. If, as was previously mentioned, we expect that the church member is going to have an open attitude concerning the music, and is going to try to see that the music does carry out a specific directive, how is he going to know the sentiments of the piece being performed if it is unfamiliar to him? The titles of the numbers being used for the prelude and offertory MUST be included in the bulletin. (The postlude might just as well be eliminated altogether. No one listens to it, anyway.) These titles are very enlightening, and very clearly give the message of the piece in a “nutshell.” However, there are congregations that are concerned enough about the music being played that they feel that the title is not sufficient information: so an insert for the bulletin is prepared each week which presents the verse in full which is most appropriate to the occasion or the pastor’s message. Also, this insert has the words of the choir anthem, and includes a rather substantial outline of the sermon. For those in the congregation who are really conscientious and concerned about the centering of their thoughts during the different sections of the service, this has proved to be a great help. Of course, there are those who feel that it is a total “waste of time.” But there is so much meaningful music contained in organ literature, which has such rich spiritual content and is very appropriate to the tone of the service as dictated by the sermon topic; must we completely ignore it because John Vander Doe never has had the opportunity to be exposed to any other music but the same hymns sung week after week in his church?
In conclusion, let me say that there is a foreseeable truce in this previously unsolvable problem. Our children are being exposed to truly great hymnody in the two song books that the National Union of Christian Schools has published: The Children’s Hymnbook and Hymns for Youth. It is appalling, however, the number of parents that criticize these hymnbooks because they do not contain the rollicking “choruses” that the children used to learn. The example comes to mind of a kindergarten teacher whose favorite song was “Zion Founded on the Mountain,” and that was the first song that her little cherubs had to learn. You can imagine what they did with the words, but the tune was shouted from the rafters, enjoyed by the children because it was “such a jumpy tune.” No thought was given to the fact that this kind of singing (?) ruins the young voice. How much better a song like “Who Made Ocean, Earth, and Sky?”—a song that can be used for any age. If the children are too young to comprehend the question, then let them sing the answer—“God our loving Father!” after the teacher has sung the question. This type of worshipful music the children love, and they sing it wholeheartedly, but it doesn’t lend itself to that horrible shouting that some teachers and parents call singing!
Let us rejoice with our children that they are being exposed to truly great hymnody, and learning to like it. Just because it sounds strange and unfamiliar to your ears, don’t discount it as no good. Remember that in all areas of our education, our standards are being raised to new heights every year. Children are learning in the sixth grade the things that were taught in the high schools only a decade ago. The same strides are being made in the field of music.
Don’t have the mental attitude, “I know what I like, don’t bother me with the facts.” You would accept an expert’s opinion in any other area where you felt a deficiency in knowledge. Why, in the field of music, does everyone feel that he is an authority? Try to change a person’s mind concerning what he feels and what stirs him, and you’ve got an impossible task on your hands. The secret is in the attitude of the individual. If he is willing to see another viewpoint, half the victory is won, the goal being his own edification.
If there is an amount of give and take on the part of the church member, and an attitude on the part of the musician to try to help the church member, and play TO him, not AT him, there should be no reason for the distinction between “edifying and offensive” in church music. All are working together for the mutual praise, adoration, and worship of God with our highest offerings!
Mrs. Wenda De Vries is the wife of Rev. James De Vries, pastor of the Haven Christian Reformed Church, Zeeland, Michigan.