Viewpoint Brief Bible Study #014-17 |
||
|---|---|---|
 |
 |
JESUS calls US to be |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
The Christian religion is the worship and service of Jesus Christ. It’s not Mary we worship, but her Son. We worship neither saints, angels, a law code, nor even God’s Spirit. It’s JESUS who is to be honored. The Bible is our guide. |
||
[Meditation based on a CHRISTIAN STANDARD article by Willard Black -- Managing Church MUSIC Problems] In the Corinthian church in early days, Paul says that "when (they) assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification" (1 Corinthians 14:26). Contrast this participatory sharing with the condition described in the first paragraph of the article below...
In the CHRISTIAN STANDARD for 7/13/97, Willard Black (director of the Institute for Christian Resources in San Jose, CA) writes about managing church music problems.For most church members "what is chosen for them to sing" is the basic church music problem. Dissatisfaction is especially high if the songs for the Sunday worship service are all contemporary choruses, all nineteenth and twentieth-century gospel songs, or all traditional hymns. [It is suggested that if everything is the same, brethren who prefer another style will feel "left out."]
"Choice of instruments" and "volume" are additional problems which may augment the primary source of stress. [In fact, the instruments chosen often determine (limit) the choice of usable songs. And if the tempo of songs is too fast or too slow, those who prefer to not be rushed, or who feel held back, have a problem which may totally prevent their participation.]
Rather than elaborate on descriptions of these and related problems, or proposing quick and simplistic solutions to them, in this article I'll focus on action steps which can make management of the problems easier.
STEP 1: Review the History of Church Music. A first, and often overlooked step, is to review how the church through the ages has used music.
[The Lord's church began on the Pentecost soon after Jesus was raised up from the dead, and then sent the Holy Spirit in power upon His apostles in Jerusalem. We hear of no problems in the first days of the church. No doubt they sang or "chanted" together. No doubt they made use of the psalms long familiar to them as Jews who worshipped Jehovah God. But no problems concerning music surfaced prior to their dispersal "into all the world."
[Later, in writing to a congregation of Jews and Gentiles, Paul speaks as is quoted above. They "each" had a psalm or other word from God, and they each shared their gift in orderly and helpful ways when the congregation met together. Paul encouraged use of musical gifts in writing to the Ephesian and Colossian churches. James points out that Christians who are happy are bound to sing. Songs are expressions of our hearts. People generally thrill to join their voices in appropriate song which expresses what is in the hearts of those people.
[Some cultures are more appreciative of vocal and instrumental music than others. Styles preferred by some are problems to others.] In early days of the Stone-Campbell Movement (early 19th century), our brothers were apt to emphasize evangelism over "worship." [They may have realized that the most real worship is done when alone or in intimate gatherings rather than in crowds.]
Early Christian Church/Church of Christ congregations were ambivalent about the use of arts, both visual and performing, in church services. In the interest of "getting the message (of the cross) across" churches sometimes minimized attention on mastering the craft of singing, playing, conducting, and composing. Our preferred music tended to be simple. It was used primarily as a vehicle to lead people to Christ and for the shared pleasure of the Christians as they shared in mutual exhortations and praises to God.
Added to this is the conviction that doctrinally, in matters of faith unity is essential, but in matters of opinion there is liberty. Music was seen to be in the realm of opinion. That decision led to the assumption that one preference was as good as another in music styles to be used in our congregations. No elaborate instruments were needed. No highly-trained choirs were required. People just sang. Later, a need for singing schools was felt, and many improved their singing abilities.
But some song leaders were preferred over others. The talents of some are different from those of their neighbors. So those most gifted came to be the ones whose service was called for.
Since people came to our undenominational position from many, varied denominations, their preferences had been shaped in many directions by their previous experiences. Also, as youth grew up in the churches and in their communities, their musical tastes were shaped by many varying influences.
We have borrowed freely from Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Presbyterians, and even from Lutherans, Anglicans, and Roman Catholic song writers. Of course we have and do and will. Therefore, DIVERSITY prevails among independently governed congregations. And this is good even if different from where worship patterns are tightly controlled by outside authorities. [In the next section, Willard Black points out what church music problems are NOT.]
Brief Bible Study #15 DIVERSITY prevails among independently-governed congregations, such as those in the fellowship which is identified as Christian Churches/Churches of Christ, followers of the Stone-Campbell Movement, the Restoration Movement.
Black wants us to realize that the problem is not really what some think of it as being, it's not conflict between "contemporary music" and "traditional music."
When it was written, ALL non-Biblical church music was contemporary. For hundreds of years there has been a stream of new songs composed by Christian musicians. Music is neither bad nor good just because it's new.
Though generational and taste preferences surface any time music issues are discussed, the problem is not clearly one of taste and generations. Many twenty-five-year-olds are comfortable with "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God," sung by younger and older men at Promise Keepers the summer of 1996.
Also, I've seen many retired persons fully engage in singing new choruses. They acquired this habit in summer camps and VBS's during the 1940s and 1950s when they were young. However, the church music problem does present itself mostly as generational if older people have not been exposed to and taught new songs, and if young people have been isolated from meetings where some traditional songs and instrumentation are used.
For most of this century, church music for both older and younger generations has been heavily impacted by pop music -- the earlier soft and mellow sounds of big dance bands in the 1950s and later the louder rock groups of the 1970s.
Churches which do not reflect the extremes of pop culture, old or new, experience less generational conflict over music. However, these same churches may be less blended in music style when their seniors, youth, or young married couples meet separately, or if they have "seeker services."
Congregations which carefully study generational differences, and which engage in dialogue, often manage their generation and musical differences as well.
It can be seen that the problem is not "use of technology," for we have always used existing and developing inventions. Organs, pianos, and hymn books are products of older technologies. Imagine how the printing press impacted the availability of hymn books only a few centuries ago! Currently, overhead projectors, video sets, computers, and sophisticated amplifiers are newer technologies with great possibilities.
For a new congregation meeting in a school gymnasium or similar rented or donated space, a digital piano, an adequate sound system, and an overhead projector can be transported and set up within one hour. With older, and limiting technologies, a keyboard would not be available in this kind of setting.
Technology's problem for us is simply in HOW it is used. For example, if amplification exceeds 85 decibels, those exposed to the noise may suffer permanent hearing loss. Excessive amplification, for any reason, is sure enough a PROBLEM in any church setting. [Part 2, now concluding, turns out to still be introductory! There ARE problems involved in church music in our generation... ]
Brief Bible Study #16 Making church music a joy, overcoming problems, can be helped by understanding certain Bible principles. Biblical principles enable Bible students to discern what is acceptable church music and what is not. The same principles should help us discriminate between church music that is poor, good, or best.
Not found among Biblical criteria for this judgment is the use of music for purposes of entertainment, attraction, performance for the sake of artistic virtuosity, or social interaction. Church music is aimed at pleasing God and those who seek to please God by their combined spiritual exercises.
Many differing styles of fine Christian music will be attractive and beautiful. While some styles might not please some Christians, it would be surprising if God were displeased by any style preferred by persons who are loved by God.
But perhaps not all are appropriate in any one congregational setting. Very informal styles will NOT be appreciated by those whose preference is for formal services. Classical music is little appreciated by those whose taste runs to guitars and music styles likely to be heard also at square dances.
Yet, all music aimed at pleasing God and honoring Him is apt to be ACCEPTABLE to our God. Just because I do not like a song does NOT mean that God does not like it!
Fifty years ago the habit of using Christian music for entertainment and for social indulgences was expressed by the bass singer in a male quartet exaggerating the lowness of the lowest tones he could produce.
Willard Black remembers (and Ray was also present more than once) when his older preacher (one who loved people and music and the Lord, all very much) placing a folding chair near the pulpit at Iron Gates Christian Church, standing on that chair for more elevation and attention while leading singing, and then pumping up the congregation to see how many "powers" could be put into "Power in the Blood." Such exercises were not quite what is meant by singing to praise and worship almighty God. They may have helped many feel good about what they were doing together during services of evangelism and fellowship.
Since Woodstock, what is different about the entertainment dimension of church music is that much of the new music is being performed with a new mix of instruments and pop/rock styles. As Americans have become more hedonistic, pleasure even during church activities has become more important to them. An entertainment dimension has been expected from almost every activity, including religious gatherings. Many now want to clap for things which entertain them, which has not always been an accepted activity in church meetings.
Willard Black recommends that music leaders should mix styles in church services, thereby offending everyone. That is, I should have said, thereby pleasing everyone part of the time.
Ray Downen wonders if a different approach might not be more pleasing to many. I see it as a problem in some ways like that which confronts us who seek unity between those who use no instruments with our singing, and those who are willing to sing with accompaniment of some kinds.
I see the day when within our one body there will be congregations which use no instruments and those which do use instruments.
Why not congregations which strongly prefer particular styles and separate congregations which reject that style and have other preferences? Some larger congregations are able to please many by having separated services, one meeting early and the other later but with the same message and messenger and only the music differing.
Some folks are willing to put up with ditties which must be repeated at least once before they're thought to be even barely adequate. Others are repelled by such. Must they be mixed in so that those who detest them must endure them in the name of congregational unity?
If those who love good hymns could have a song service of good hymns, they would be edified and not forced to endure what they can't help but consider poor music. Those who like the ditties could have a separate service where there were no hymns, which they apparently don't like. Wouldn't both groups then be better off?
Willard Black's concluding remarks are: "By God's design, in music intellect and emotion are united -- a powerful combination. Though we do have some problems with our church music, the problems can be managed if, in the spirit of Christ we reason together and seek the fullness, richness, and diversity of songs and instrumentation approved by God in Scripture."
But leave the drums for Africa, please! Or at least in those services where meaningless ditties are used so that adult Christians don't choose to be present if it can be avoided.
Brief Bible Study #14 thru 16 from Ray Downen. To go back to
Viewpoint's first page, click < here. Or here to go on to Viewpoint Study 17. For Ray's concluding remarks, click HERE.
