AUDIO
 |
Phillip Jensen speaks on Anger as part of a series on emotions in the Christian life, delivered at the Australia Day Convention 2010
|
One of the easiest targets in the church music scene is surely the ‘Jesus-my-boyfriend’ songs.
It seems so straight forward to make fun of inane lyrics and an indeterminate object of affection.
A good example of this kind of critique comes from an interview in Leadership magazine with Kristyn and Keith Getty. (Getty wrote ‘In Christ alone’ along with other church songs).
Keith says: “If I’ve got non-Christian friends coming to church, I’d far rather give them four verses of comparatively heavy theology with some theological words which explains the gospel, than give them twenty repeated words that could be said about your per horse or your girlfriend.” (Leadership, Winter 2009, page 24)
The trouble I have with this position, is that many of us take up this argument up without thinking through the consequences. We have set up a false comparison between songs that express devotion (Jesus-my-boyfriend style) and songs that are true and therefore safe (a new doctrine for each verse, or the entire life of Jesus in one song).
A quick survey of the Psalms reveals that the LORD God is mentioned by name in all of them, which surely delivers a knock-out blow to the songs with an indeterminate object of affection.
Yet, the expressions of emotions, and even repetitive phrases in the Psalms suggest that clear theology is not the sole aim of approaching God in song.
In fairness to Keith Getty, he explains in the same article, his own understanding of the job of a song, “…it has to teach the truth of God in a way that is emotionally engaging and poetic.”
I just hope we aren’t making the mistake of loading each song with the full responsibility of encompassing all that we want to say to God and about God, when we are gathered as God’s people.
Wouldn’t it be great if our range of songs included the kind of emotional and theological expanse we see in the book of Psalms?
Indeed, maybe where we have gone wrong is to give up on singing the Psalms.
A friend of mine once pointed out how this, once rich, Anglican tradition, of sharing a Psalm in our gathering, had almost vanished for want of easy and adaptable tunes.
Recently, I tried to put a Psalm from the NIV to a tune that would not sound out of place in a contemporary church, yet be easy enough to pick up and sing along to. Maybe this effort will be rewarded with people who judge songs from the theological and emotional content that we might learn from in God’s word.
Jonathan Holt is a church planter and Anglican minister in Canberra. He will be speaking at the Twist Away Conference in June this year.
Hi Jonathan, isn't that the sort of thing Psalm Praise tried to do a generation ago?
O love divine, how sweet thou art!
When shall I find my willing heart
All taken up by thee?
I thirst, I faint, I die to prove
The greatness of redeeming love,
The love of Christ to me.
Stronger His love than death or hell;
Its reaches are unsearchable;
The first born sons of light
Desire in vain its depths to see;
They cannot reach the mystery
The length, and breadth, and height.
God only knows the love of God;
O that it now were shed abroad
In this poor stony heart!
For love I sigh, for love I pine;
This only portion, Lord, be mine,
Be mine this better part.
O that I could forever sit
With Mary at the Master’s feet;
Be this my happy choice;
My only care, delight, and bliss,
My joy, my heaven on earth, be this
To hear the Bridegroom’s voice.
O that, with humbled Peter, I
Could weep, believe, and thrice reply,
My faithfulness to prove.
Thou know’st, (for all to Thee is known,
Thou know’st, O Lord, and Thou alone,
Thou know’st that Thee I love.
O that I could, with favored John,
Recline my weary head upon
The dear Redeemer’s breast!
From care, and sin, and sorrow free,
Give me, O Lord, to find in Thee
My everlasting rest.
Thy only love do I require,
Nothing on earth beneath desire,
Nothing in heaven above;
Let earth, and heaven, and all things go,
Give me Thy only love to know,
Give me only Thy love.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
please come back to Sydney!!
more intellectually serious, evangelically faithful, experimental and affectionate songs please!
Another major difference is that JIMBF songs sometimes don't mention God or Jesus by name. They are not always explicitly Christian, which means that the lyrics (eg "I love you, I need you") could quite easily be directed towards a person rather than upon God.
A third major difference is that JIMBF are not just light on theology, they often focus on the feelings of the individual towards God/Jesus rather than the reason for such feelings. EG, a JIMBF song might say "I love you God, I need you always, you make me feel good", while a good Christian song would say "I love you Lord for you have rescued me from death through Christ, I thank you God for making me and placing me here on earth" - there is a reason which follows a declaration of love or devotion. BTW, that is the big thing about the Psalms - they are full of expressions of love and devotion BECAUSE of something God has done.
Finally, watch this Youtube video of Olivia Newton John and tell me whether you can see where Darlene Zschech gets her onstage influence from.
Beholding Your beauty
Is all that I long for
To worship You Jesus
Is my sole desire
For this very heart
You have shaped for be your pleasure
Purposed to lift Your Name higher
Here in surrender
In pure adoration
I enter Your courts
With an offering of praise
I am Your servant
Come to bring You glory
As is fit for the work of Your hands
Now unto the Lamb
Who sits on the throne
Be glory and honor and praise
All of creation resounds with the song
Worship and praise Him
The Lord of lords
Spirit now living
And dwelling within me
Keep my eyes fixed
Ever on Jesus' face
Let not the things of this world
Ever sway me
I'll run 'til I finish the race
Now unto the Lamb
Who sits on the throne
Be glory and honor and praise
All of eternity echoes the song
Worship and praise Him
The Lord of lords
Holy Lord
You are holy
Jesus Christ
Is the Lord
Now unto the Lamb
Who sits on the throne
Be glory and honour and praise
Call all the sinners to join in the song
Worship and praise Him
The Lord of lords
Bach's cantatas express deep emotion for Jesus, but are also full of theology.
There is a place for expressing our love for Jesus, who is not our boyfriend, but our Bridegroom.
But we also need to sing songs that address the trinitarian nature of our faith, and do not leave out the other two members of the Holy Trinity.
I think we can sometimes be a little too harsh on the so-called 'JIMBF' songs.
For example, comments have been made over the focus on the individual...but many classic hymns also have singular pronouns!(eg And Can it Be, Be Thou My Vision, When I Survey etc.)
Again, if a song doesn't have an explicit address, I am sure the context in which the song is sung will make clear to whom it is about/addressed.
Another common criticism seems to be that the're light on theology, high on personal expressions of emotion. Obviously the two aren't mutually exclusive, but I think it is both glorifying to God and helpful for our 'religious affections' to sing songs that call us to express our love for God in a personal and intimate way. In fact, perhaps, the lack of such somgs, and the attitudes that lie behind them, has contributed to the 'spiritual dryness' often reported in our churches.
Singing is not just about teaching (I am not suggesting anyone here is saying this!). It is about giving God the devotion he deserves and stirring each other to love and good deeds. Many so called 'JIMBF' songs may help some people in our churches do that. Perhaps some of the 'evangelical alternatives' in the past have failed here.
If JIMBF songs were all we sung, there may be a problem - but in a varied and thought through songslist, these songs may well play a vital role. We need to evaluate our songlists as a whole, rather than expecting every song to do all things.
Many old hymns are fantastic, but even there, you have some that are just Victorian romanticism with a veneer of sickly pietism. Just about anything with the word 'sweet' (except perhaps Jesus the very thought of thee, which is actually pretty gutsy)
One thing that makes me cringe in modern songs is a misuse of Bible symbols. There is a modern chorus added to 'Amazing Grace' that refers to the end of the world as melting snow, and God's mercy as a flood. Someone doesn't read their Bible.
Jonathan: the idea of actually singing the Psalms is awesome. Many of them would have been sung and I'm with you, it's a tradition we've saidly lost.
If I can add, anyone wanting to find out the how of writing a hymn/song study the Psalms.
Someone might say, you cant do emo music in church....
Is it singable? Yes, 5,000 blokes cant be wrong.
Does it edify? Yes, experiencing it with others on the night was awesome
Does it emotively connect? Yes, I would even think about raising my hands in church for this sort of stuff :P
Does it worship God? I think so, yes, at that level it is about mindset
I reckon we need keen, musically minded people to get us out of the genre trap we have in Christian conventional music circles. This would also help us missionally in our church contexts. At the moment, most of our music is great, but it is mono in regards its genre.....
I have that desire to see this in church, but an sadly musically challenged...
Is this only true of my experience?
Isnt normal church music a modern phenomenon also, which must be rejected, becasue it was a change based on staying relevant with the world many years ago? In other words, at some stage, someone found Beethoven boring, and rebelled against that with an electric guitar. We have just settled for John Farnham music in church in a contemporary sense. I am not saying we start music which is rebellious in nature, but is cuturally relevant, emotive, and enjoyable to sing.
I would also argue that what was once 'alternative' in pop culture is now so mainstream that most people would not see rock music as a rebellion at all, but simply entertainment....
And if it is morally neutral, then it can be used either for idolarty or worship, thats what i mean by mindset....
I wasn't labelling Steve anything. I do concentrate on ideas not people : )
Perhaps there is an overlap between Plato and gnosis. A church that minimises the physical, whether it be historical facts or bread/wine/oil or music or physical posture is a bit gnostic.
Music is not a simple issue. It takes a lot of wisdom. But it is not morally neutral, or at least not without definite character. You wouldn't play a square dance at your mother's funeral unless you hated her. Horses for courses.
Some of the modern genres are about rebellion, pure (well, uncut) and simple. Music is going to evolve, whatever we do. But church music, whether contemplative or celebrational, needs to be reverent. Recycling defiance and importing it into the sanctuary is what brought Solomon down. It makes us ineffective.
An important thing to note is that western music originated from church music. Now it's the other way around. The church should be starting with Scripture and working out its music from there. There are some church bands in America doing it, and the results are awesome. They are leading the way.
http://www.auburnavenue.org/inmediasres/Podcast_16.mp3
Like Jonathon, I wonder if we've been trying to remedy the JIMB problem by putting theological correctness on a pedestal, to the point where our attempts at "good songs" must somehow be theologically exhaustive.
Yet attempts to squeeze (eg) an entire theology of atonement into one song (musical quality aside) are just as likely to end in artistic butchery, theological distortion and a paltry means of worship. In fact, the more theology we try to squeeze into 5 minutes of music, the more inadequate it likely gets.
I've found some recent evangelical songs, apparently devised as theological tours de force, to be every bit as cringe-worthy and off putting as "Jesus is my boyfriend". I'm all for theological robustness in our music, but being theologically exhaustive kills me dead!
The question of musical character also involves context. If your grandmother loved square dancing then it might well be appropriate to play a square dance tune. The notion and tempo, for example, of worshipful depends on denomination and possibly your generation. This term used to mean exuberant and brisk and now equates for many with slow. As to cultural origins, context and culture, I wonder what music would have been used by Moses in Exodus 15. Had Jacob's family established a musical style that survived the time in Egypt, or did the Israelites borrow music from the Egyptians? In the context of praise of Yahweh and lyrics that made the purpose of the song clear, the origins of the song became of secondary importance. But it must have been catchy, because it receives a number of encores.
Teach us to number our days aright
Measure each step using faith not sight
May we have hearts that in wisdom delight
Teach us to number our days
From everlasting creator and Lord
You have been our dwelling place
Help us remember that we are but dust
Sinners in need of your grace
Our days pass quickly and we fly away
Losing all we thought to gain
Prosper the work of our hands in your name
May we not labour in vain
Fill us each day with the fruits of your love
May we be glad all our days
Singing for joy of the things you have done
Your mighty splendour to praise
Those word are actually from the original lyrics of Amazing Grace, well I assume you're referring to the section ...
"The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God, who call’d me here below,
Will be forever mine."
Surely you're not implying that Newton didn't read his Bible!?! Just curious, what problems do you have with those symbols? I don't see anything wrong with them.
A flood is the rising of the Abyss in judgment, and after the historical flood, it was used by the prophets to picture Gentile nations flooding in from the 'outer courts' boundary over the four-cornered 'Altar' of Israel to wipe out the unfaithful 'sons of God.' It is used to picture Egypt, Babylon, and even the false teachings of the Judaisers in Revelation 12, but never mercy.
Snow only gets one negative rap, and that is the whiteness of 'leprosy' (actually, plague). In this case, it is the evil twin of true glory. It is death masquerading as life, an un-covering instead of a glorious robe.
"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you are like whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but within are full of dead [men's] bones, and of all uncleanness."
The symbols are important, and we are mostly illiterate concerning them. They are not poetic fluff in any way. God communicates truth by His word to interpret His creation. But we think like Greeks instead of Hebrews.
Snow- I could only try and distinguish that while the Bible passage refers to the appearance of snow, the song refers to the process of melting/"dissolving" snow, and so the symbolism is different?
Flood of mercy (which isn't actually in the original, only the snow part is, sorry if my initial post was misleading)
Just as God's judgment and justice is flood-like (overwhelming, uncontrollable, complete) so too is God's love and mercy correspondingly flood-like in bringing us back to him through sending Jesus to take this punishment for us?
Snow-
Job 24:19
"As heat and drought snatch away the melted snow,
so the grave snatches away those who have sinned."
So the earth dissolving like snow may be linked to this kind of imagery?
Now the flood...
Joshua 3:15 "Now the Jordan is at flood stage all during harvest..."
OK so its not symbolism, but there's a definate association between a flood and needs being provided for, etc
Isiah 66:12
"For thus says the LORD:"Behold, I will extend peace to her (Jerusalem) like a river, and the glory of the nations like an overflowing stream..."
Here the overflowing stream (flood in NIV, and really, what's the difference between that and an overflowing stream) is connected to things that God is promising to provide in abundance.
In several passages (eg Malachi 3:10) it talks obout God promising to "open up the windws of heaven" (sometimes translated as floodgates) and promising to "pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need." The connections between pouring of blessing and flood imagery in relation to mercy are easy to make I think.
Its certainly very interesting!
Re the flood, in the Bible, waters from above speak of resurrection and waters from below of the Abyss. Noah went up and the sinners went down. Rivers are waters from above, like the Laver and the crystal sea. Baptism in Jordan is resurrection. So there is a difference between that and the Gentile sea full of monsters flooding onto the Land.
I don't think it's wrong to use our own images. But God has given us a book full of symbols from His creation and we most often don't 'get' them. They are consistent, meaningful and potent. He's given us a king's feast and we are content to serve the Devon from our uninspired, confused subconscious, in both our music and our prayers. : )
Or perhaps I should just find a copy of this?
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/pdf_lastdays/TOTUSCHRISTUS-Intro+Ch1.pdf
;-)