Singing in Worship – Cause or Response?
Sitting here cogitating on the topic of singing in worship again. My good friend Joel Porter commented on my post highlighting a couple of quotes by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and he made some valid points. I hold my original position that the corporate worship assembly is not the place to introduce the concept of professional or quasi-professional singing, or any other type of artistic demonstration, for that matter. But still, iron sharpens iron and Joel’s comment inspired me to process my thoughts just a little more.
It occurred to me that in all of our discussions about music in worship (instrumental, praise team, acapella, etc) that we have the cart way out in front of the horse. Maybe so far in front of the horse that the traces don’t even reach. What follows might be a little “stream of consciousness” writing, but bear with me for a few moments.
It seems to me that so much of our debate on the format of worship is focused entirely upon our own estimation of that worship, and then we judge it (favorably or unfavorably) as if we were on God’s throne. Songs that evoke strong emotions are lauded and whether they are performed by a congregation or a soloist the comment is the same – “I was moved to tears,” or “it was just a mountain top feeling.” Thus, because we have such an emotion, the song and the event in which the song was performed had to be a worshipful experience. Likewise, if a particular song repulsed us there could not possibly be anything valuable in the song, because we either felt nothing, or actually felt a negative response.
Do you see the thread? If the song evoked positive emotion then it was worship. If it evoked no emotion or a negative emotion then there was no worship.
The same is true of instrumental music. Many claim that an instrument adds so much to worship because it makes the music portion sound so much better. Others, and I have to include myself in this group, recoil against the use of instruments because far from enriching the music of the worship I feel it actually detracts and diminishes the purpose of the worship assembly (and yes, I also have other reasons I reject the use of instruments in worship). Once again, do you see the common denominator?
Enter my thoughts about the biblical psalms and other recorded examples of Jewish and early Christian worship. Did they use song to create a worshipful experience, or were the psalms and other recorded hymns the result of a worship experience that was then put to paper? To me the question may not solve the issue, but it certainly clarifies it.
If the psalms and hymns were written as a result of a tragic, or a prayerful or an ecstatic experience that has volumes to say about our worship. I suddenly realized that all too often we use our songs and hymns to create a worship experience in our hearts, when we should be communicating to God the worship experiences that we have had all week long. If we use our songs as a tool to create a worshipful experience we are in effect saying that our emotions are the final arbiter of the worship experience. Anything that we can use to manipulate that emotional response becomes fair game. We can use maudlin lyrics. We can use throbbing tunes. We can use special effects (solos, leads for certain registers, etc.) If we as humans set the goal, then anything we as humans can use to hit that goal becomes a legitimate tool for worship.
Except, our emotions are not the final arbiter. Whether we feel ecstatic, sad, joyful, remorseful or any other emotion is utterly meaningless if our gift is an offering to God. The result might be sadness or joy or relief, but that is not the gift itself. The gift is the worship, the emotion is the result.
At what point was the ancient Israelite sacrifice actually considered worship? Was it when the carcass of the animal was burned? Was it when the throat of the animal was cut? Was it when the animal was being led up to the altar? Or was it when the farmer or shepherd walked out to his field, looked over his group of yearling sheep or bulls and selected the best, most fit animal for the offering? The actual sacrifice took place when the farmer removed that prize animal from the lot and he knew he would not have its services to strengthen his flock. Then, as he watched that animal die he could make the connection (or not) to his relationship with God. Was it a fellowship offering, a sin offering, a thank offering? The sacrifice came first – the emotion could only come as a result of the sacrifice.
You see, we teach that our songs and prayers and sermons and fellowship are all “worship.” We go to extravagant lengths to make the “worship” meaningful. But, if we have not prepared the gift long before we arrive, all we are doing is manipulating our fickle human emotions with gimmicks, whether we use instruments, praise teams OR simple acapella singing.
I am still working and processing this question in my mind. But I have hit upon a new direction for my future thoughts. I do not want my offering in the corporate assembly to be manipulated by cheap tricks. I want to bring God the best of my possessions, and that includes songs and hymns. But that process begins on Monday and will only be final on Sunday as I share with God what I have experienced through the week. That includes joy, sadness, questions, fears, doubts, repentance, and thankfulness.
Sorry for the rambling nature of this post. I am simply an apprentice in the journey toward spiritual maturity. I appreciate your thoughts as we walk the path together.
Posted on February 7, 2012, in Church, Worship and tagged Church, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Hymn, Spirituality, Worship. Bookmark the permalink. 14 Comments.
I like the thoughts.
I did want to throw out one idea that I hadn’t thought of, though it might have fit better with the Bonhoeffer post. I hadn’t thought about the fact that the Old Testament temple had a great number of Levites who were dedicated full-time to music. I had always thought that their music was pretty rudimentary, but it would seem likely that they actually used fairly complex music. (And, now that I think of it, the headings to the psalms would seem to point to that as well)
Not sure that means that we have to be “professional” in our worship, but if we aim at that, we have precedent for it.
Tim, I’m running short of time here so I may add to these comments later, but I have been thinking about the professionalism of the temple worship as well, and what that might teach for us, if anything. My initial response is that worship in the first century church appears to have taken such a radical break from temple Judaism that I wonder if the “professional” worship leader was not also a part of the past that the church wanted to separate from (does that sentence make any sense??) Much of that is related to Christology – the temple sacrifices being replaced by the sacrifice of Jesus, the shift from pure Sabbath worship to worship on the “Lord’s Day,” the institution of the memorial feast, etc.
I am not a patristic historian by any stretch of the imagination. It just seems to me that there was not only a radical break in worship content (Jesus is the Messiah) but also form. Many questions still persist in my mind – was this due purely to doctrine, or was some of it simply because there was no “professional” worship leaders in the first century? The book of Acts records the conversion of “many priests,” so that would kind of militate against the second of those options.
Arrgh, I have to go – but thanks for the prod. Good questions inevitably lead to good theology – or at least that is what I hope!!
Paul
It seems nearly impossible to maintain a professional cadre of worship leaders without a centralized locus of worship and the hierarchy that follows.
As the locus of worship became wherever kingdom citizens gathered, and as hierarchy seems to have morphed into koinonia partnership in kingdom work, I think that the inevitable result was the elimination of such a cadre. Form follows function.
This is challenging stuff – I’m glad Tim pointed me this way!
I don’t think the arithmetic of sacrifice is as simple as, “The gift is the worship; the emotion is the result.” I believe that the emotions are part of the gift – but that may just be my perspective as someone who is more comfortable expressing emotion publicly than my parents were.
Also, I would offer a warning about the “me and God” on Sunday morning mindset that so much of our worship thinking assumes. We’ve got a whole bunch of other hours in the week for “me and God” time. The assembly is “God and us” time, and I think that should affect how we think about our Sunday morning worship more than it seems to.
Nick, thanks for joining in! Your comment about emotions being a part of the gift is appreciated. Often when we write “off the cuff” we tend to overstate some things and understate others. I do not want to minimize the role of emotion (after all, God gave them to us!) but I certainly do not think that they should be the goal of worship – and that was really what I was thinking about.
I like the “me and God” v. “God and us” aspect of corporate worship. Thank you!
Paul
I *completely* agree that emotions should not be the goal, nor should “how it made me feel” be the major factor in evaluating the quality of worship.
I wonder if our attention span and craving for entertainment drives that, even among those whose hearts have no true interest in being entertained on Sunday morning. I don’t think we can evaluate the quality of our worship in such a short-term fashion. The quality of our worship will only really express itself long-term, in how our life is being transformed into Christlikeness.
I also appreciate your idea that we shouldn’t be trying to evaluate our worship (that’s not our job, since we’re not the target) but rather evaluating our sacrifice. Might it be fair to suggest that it is because of our lack of sacrifice, and lack of interest in the concept, that we’re so much more interested in evaluating the worship experience? Almost a pathological thing where in order to distract ourselves from where we know our focus should be, we choose to keep our focus somewhere else?
Wow, Nick – introducing the *sacrifice* bomb. That could get a preacher fired!
Sacrifice just sounds so, well, Jewish. And, after all, didn’t Jesus do away with the old law? Doesn’t God want me to be healthy, wealthy and wise? As Oddball would say in the classic movie, “Kelley’s Heroes,” “What is with all the negative waves?”
The Israelite who had to select a yearling bull, or a yearling lamb, or even “two turtledoves or pigeons” realized right up front how much that sacrifice was costing him. We gather in heated and cooled buildings and sit on cushioned pews and bemoan our “sacrifice.” I have been studying the book of Amos in depth recently, and am more than just a little uncomfortable with the language he uses concerning the false worship of the northern tribes.
The last sentence in your last paragraph is profound. Being in the presence of a Holy God is disturbing, or at least it should be. I myself am entirely too complacent in this area. Thanks again for the conversation.
Kept thinking about the sacrifice example/analogy. At the risk of pushing it too far, I wanted to mention something that I learned over the last few years, that you probably already know.
Most sacrifices didn’t end at the altar. They were followed by a celebratory meal, “eating and drinking in the presence of the Lord.” The enjoyment of the worshipers was part of the worship.
Could it be that there should still be an element of enjoyment in our worship?
Tim, in a word – absolutely! I think perhaps I have overstated my concern about emotional response to worship – something that I am prone to do. But I think worship should include all the emotions – sorrow for sin, repentance, a sadness for the condition of the world, and as the service moves through confession and supplication to the pronouncement of forgiveness we should end with uplifting joy. (BTW – more than 30% of the psalms are psalms of lament. THAT should tell us something about emotion in worship!). I think that is communicated by the fellowship meal of the OT, and at the risk of overstating the analogy, something akin to the “love feast” in the NT. By limiting the worship “service” to the “five acts of worship” we have interrupted the natural flow of worship, and in doing so we have felt the need to manufacture the emotions that we intuitively feel must be present. Another barrier that we have erected to the worship experience is the “one hour and we’re done” mentality. In visiting with missionaries to various other cultures they are astounded that we Americans can think we can force so much into such a short period of time. If we desire the whole roller coaster of emotions in such a short period of time we HAVE to manipulate them to some extent, instead of allowing them to flow freely as a natural consequence of the worship experience.
Just to reiterate – I do not like the idea of manufacturing emotions in order to give or add legitimacy to our “worship service.” However, we should not attempt to deny them or argue they are inappropriate. To go back to the title of the post, what is the cause and what is the response of worship? As Dr. Willis was fond of saying, let’s put the em-PHASIS on the correct syll-ABBLE.
I’ll leave the discussion to the three of you . . . well most of it anyway. I am rather simple in my thinking, but here goes my “off the cuff” addition . . . As a preaching minister and at one time hired song leader (cantor, worship leader, etc.) I tend to think there is or should be a combination of emotion that motivates singing (worship) and emotion stirred by corporate singing. Let me see if I can expound:
Ideally we should each come to worship to express our praise to God for what He is doing in our lives including the daily blessings, spiritual blessings, and especially the undeserved salvation that is ours by God’s grace through faith. When we as His children realize the privilege we have for God to call us His children that stirs an emotion that should move us to praise. When we see what God does for us, that should move us to sacrifice our F.A.T. (Finances, Abilities, and Time) in, but not limited to, our worship. Our assembling to worship together (God and us) should be a time of corporate praise, mutual encouragement, and celebration of God and Christ. Regretfully, that is the ideal setting and not always actualized in each and every member.
In reality, we are living in a world of cares. A world that pulls us in a multiplicity of directions that drain our energy, time, ability, and finances. In reality, many come to worship drained of emotion and looking for light. A corporate worship has potential to bring us from lethargy to praise as the “experience” of worshiping along side others impacts our emotion. Maybe that is why we are to speak to one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. Maybe that is why the Hebrew writer says that neglecting assembly is wrong and that assembling can stir us up (provoke us) to love and good works.
I do not think this is an either-or situation but both. in worship we both bring our emotions to our praise of God and Christ and we stir up each others emotions by our praise of God and Christ.
Just my musings.
Scott, I really appreciate your last few lines, “In reality, many come to worship drained of emotion and looking for light. A corporate worship has potential to bring us from lethargy to praise as the “experience” of worshiping along side others impacts our emotion. Maybe that is why we are to speak to one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. Maybe that is why the Hebrew writer says that neglecting assembly is wrong and that assembling can stir us up (provoke us) to love and good works. I do not think this is an either-or situation but both. in worship we both bring our emotions to our praise of God and Christ and we stir up each others emotions by our praise of God and Christ.”
It is difficult to hold the “both/and” in legitimate tension. You are absolutely correct in that there are times when I arrive for “worship” when being in the assembly is the LAST thing I want to do, because I am hurting, angry, bitter, or as you said, just drained of every emotion. So, in that sense the worship experience changes me and reorients my life to the center. I believe that is healthy and certainly a “balm in Gilead” for the hurting soul.
On the other extreme, however, is the smarmy, maudlin, sing every verse of “Just As I Am” five times until we get a person to “respond to the invitation” that just sets my teeth on edge. I do not believe that you are advocating that in any way, shape or form, but it was a situation that I was exposed to growing up and I have a decidedly negative response to that (or, could you notice?).
So, in short, I appreciate your musings, as we are encouraged to worship with our entire being – including emotions. Thanks for joining the conversation.
You are correct, I do not appreciate using worship to purposely invoke emotion (manipulate emotion). I saw this way too much when I was in Youth Ministry and when going to week-long gospel meetings growing up in the Bible Belt. God is powerful enough to work through His Word without our giving guilt trips and manipulating people.
Pingback: Emotions and worship | TimothyArcher.com/Kitchen
Pingback: this went thru my mind |