A few years ago, I was invited to conduct the worship services at a Christian Reformed church in western Michigan. Before the evening service, as I sat in the consistory room, one of the elders informed me that a vocal group from a local Baptist church would be presenting some “special music” before and during the service. I was further advised that it was the custom in that church for the pastor to thank the group for their renditions.

My sermon that evening dealt with the second coming of our Lord. Evidently, the musical group had been informed of my sermon theme, since they had selected a song that also dealt with Christ’s return. But as the group performed, it was obvious that their views regarding the last things were radically different from those which I would soon be presenting in my message. The number they had chosen reflected a dispensational, premilleniam eschatology or doctrine of the last things.

Clearly, I was in a difficult position. I had been asked in advance to publicly thank people who had, in song, set forth views that were heretical. Fumbling for words, I thanked them for being present that evening, avoiding any mention of their music and its faulty theology.

It was a curious situation, and regrettably, one which other pastors have also experienced. If I had set forth in my sermon the same views the quartet had presented in song, I would have been liable to the discipline of the church, and rightly so. I would like to think that the elders of the congregation would have done their duty and demanded a public retraction and apology had I abused my privileges as a guest by proclaiming an un-Reformed eschatology. But since the heresy came in the form of a song instead of a sermon, it was not only to be tolerated, I was to express appreciation to the vocal group for contradicting the Reformed position and my sermon!

The Problem of “Special Music”

This points up a problem faced by many congregations in these days, the problem of “special music.” All too often, both in terms of the quality of the music and the doctrinal content of the words, special music is an embarrassment to any congregation that identifies herself with the Reformed heritage. Music is a very important part of the worship service, one which, if properly used, is a real blessing to those who have gathered for worship. But, as all good things, music can be abused.

Church music has become one of the most controversial issues within the local church today. The consistory’s music committee has a difficult and thankless task as it attempts to conscientiously supervise music in the worship services, particularly if it tries to follow the “Statement of Principle for Music in Church” as found in the front of the Psalter Hymnal.

There is pressure from the congregation to schedule more “special music” like the church down the road does. Many members will be very unhappy if the song service leader is required to limit his selections to numbers coming from the Psalter Hymnal instead of using a paper bound edition of “favorite hymns,” many of which are blatantly Arminian.

Endorsement by Silence

Our current situation regarding music is especially serious since few people today recognize any of the perils presented by the trends in church music today. Even churches that are in other ways very conservative are often very liberal and permissive as far as music is concerned. It is very difficult to correct a problem when no one sees it for what it is.

What are the dangers of today’s musical trends? First, as illustrated before, via the music which we allow in our worship services, we often bring in teachings that are Arminian, dispensational and subjectivistic. Many of the songs in “song service hymnals” speak of man as having free will, of Christ’s atonement as if it were general instead of particular, and of the rapture and tribulation, to cite but a few teachings we are convinced are unbiblical. “Special musicians” many times choose numbers with the same weaknesses, and preface the rendition with a subjectivistic, often shallow “testimony.” Through our silence, we endorse these views.

Arminian View of Worship

While there is no valid justification for such practices, an appeal is often made to the musical tastes and preferences of the congregation. It is argued that if a large enough segment within the church “enjoys” such music, it ought to be allowed. But the question must be asked: Is the consistory to lead the church in these matters, or is it simply to follow the clamorings of a vocal minority (or even a majority, for that matter)?

This line of thought also illustrates a second danger, one which threatens our worship services in general. In many cases, the worship service has degenerated into mere entertainment, and faulty “music” deserves a large part of the blame. If one comes to church merely to be “entertained,” he will have the wrong perspective on all that takes place in the service. We come to church to worship the living God and to be nourished by His Word as proclaimed. Thus, the focus and emphasis must be on God and His Word, not on man and his enjoyment. Whenever this man-centered or Arminian view of worship infects people, there will be a decided preference for outward show to the neglect of solid, Biblical content both in music and in sermons.

Further Effects of “Special Music”

In evaluating music today, we must not overlook the potential consequences of “special music” on the local church and the musicians themselves. When music committees insist on frequently bringing in groups from other churches, they often stifle budding talent within their own congregations—talent which would be far easier for the consistory to supervise with regard to song selections. One must also ask about the spiritual consequences for musicians and their families, when they must be in a different church every Sunday evening. I would suggest that those consequences are far from beneficial.

Necessary Guidelines

If special music is to be part of our worship services, it must focus on the worship of God and the edification of His people, and not on the entertainment of man or the exhibition of the talents of a person or group. In this light, some churches require that special music be rendered from the balcony so that it is less likely to become a performance or to detract from the orderliness of the service.

Furthermore, special music must not in any way detract from the preaching of the Word. The content of music presented should not contradict or detract from the Reformed conception of the Truth, but should rather be an integral part of the service and should suit the t heme chosen by the pastor whenever possible. It goes without saying that no one should expect the minister to cut short his message in order to conclude the service within an hour under any circumstances, least of all because “special music” took up ten minutes of the service.

It is for good reason that the Church Order requires consistories to supervise the music of the church (Article 52, b and c). The theology implicit in the songs used within the worship service has a way of making an impression on the minds of worshipers, just as do the shoddy morals of rock and country music when heard in daily situations. Is it any wonder that many church members today cannot distinguish an Arminian from an armadillo when we allow man-centered hymns to have a part in our worship? Our fathers broke from the Reformed Church in America in part over this issue of church music. In so doing, they were not being “picky” or overly critical. They recognized the subtle power of music to lead spiritual lambs astray.

It behooves consistories everywhere to redouble their efforts to screen all church music in the light of Reformed principles. Our Reformed heritage is too precious to be sold for a song.