...The Nature of Praise and Worship Music
Contemporary praise and
worship music has become a fixture in evangelical churches. There is no turning back the tide. It is here to stay. But the form and understanding of the genre
has “run off the tracks” in many places.
What the Jesus People experienced in their worship gatherings is often
far from what a worshipper in a typical evangelical church in America might
experience forty years later. I recall
in the mid-1980’s attending a number of church growth conferences where the
facilitators – who seemingly had no experience or expertise in worship theology
– told their audiences that praise and worship music must be embraced in order
for their church to grow. Frequently,
the music was adopted and embraced without the ethos that was present in the
early days of Calvary Chapel and the Vineyard.
I believe the disconnect was a contributing factor to the worship wars.
In their corporate worship,
the early Jesus People were experiencing a whole new dynamic as they sang to
God rather than just about God.
Through their new, simple music, the evangelical church was waking up to
engaging with God in worship. Unlike the
revivalists before them, music for the Jesus People was not just a warm-up to
“prepare the hearts of the people” for the preacher. Music
had its own worth as a conduit of engagement with God in worship. Practitioners, theologians, and historians
would later identify this quality as a sacrament.[1] In my mind,
contemporary praise music as a sacrament is the great gift and paradigm shift
that happened in evangelical corporate worship and is a legacy of the
movement. People actually began to
connect with God through their singing.
It would be arrogant to assert that this kind of worship had never
happened before. It certainly had. A.W. Tozer
spoke of deep spiritual engagement as he sang classic hymns.[2] But after
several generations of Evangelicals on a full
diet of testimony gospel songs, the new “praise choruses” ushered in a whole
new understanding and experience in worship.
Jesus
People were not ashamed to express publicly how they felt about God. The
movement was an environment in which people were not afraid of the mysterious
work of God and were willing to take a risk to experience more of him in their
lives. The hunger and desire for genuine
connection with God through music is at the heart of the Praise and Worship
Movement. Every description of Jesus
People worship illustrates their passion to connect with him. The closed eyes, the raised hands, the tears,
were all manifestations of people who unashamedly were seeking a divine
encounter. Worshipping through
contemporary praise and worship music is, in a sense, a transcendent and
mystical experience. And it is, almost
always, an emotional experience.
One cannot sing praise and
worship songs the same way that gospel hymns were sung – “to prepare hearts to
hear the sermon.” The one who sings praise and worship songs with the same
expectations that he sings hymns will be disappointed. Generally, hymns express compact theological
truths through profound and beautiful poetry.
While they engage the emotions, their primary value is in the substance
of their text; they engage the intellect.
Most praise and worship songs, on the other hand, express a theological
concept simply, but in a deeply emotional way.
They engage the affections.
Admittedly, such a distinction between traditional hymns and praise and
worship songs is simplistic. There are
hymns that are very emotional – many of the Lutheran chorales come to
mind. And there are praise and worship
songs that have deep theology – “Remembrance”
by Matt Maher and Matt Redman is an excellent example, exploring the mystery of
the Eucharist. But the distinction of
praise and worship songs being necessarily emotional is an important one to
make for this discussion.
In our modern world, we are
prone to exalt reason over emotion. You
see it everywhere in our culture – even our Christian culture. It is acceptable to demean and marginalize our
emotions. But such a divide between intellect and
emotion is unfortunate and unnecessary.
It is definitely not biblical.
Read the psalms. They are
drenched with emotion. We are to love
the Lord with all our heart, soul, and strength (Deut. 6:8). Praise and worship songs can help to give
voice to our emotions and affections toward God. That is why people in praise and worship
cultures lift their hands, close their eyes, and are not afraid of tears. Some of them even jump around and dance! In order to understand and engage with God
through praise and worship music, the worshipper needs to be willing to release
his or her emotions into the song. They
have to engage emotionally, to enter into the affect or feeling of the song.[3]
The Jesus People Movement is
closely associated with the Charismatic Movement. While Chuck Smith allowed, but moderated, the
practice of supernatural spiritual gifts like healing and speaking in tongues,
John Wimber and the Vineyard churches celebrated them. Grace World Outreach in St. Louis, where
Hosanna! Music was birthed, was Charismatic as well. Nearly every ministry where contemporary
praise and worship was being generated at the beginning of the movement had
some level of Charismatic influence. It
is not surprising, then, that many non-Charismatics find it difficult to
understand and embrace the kind of transcendent experience in singing that the
Jesus People knew. Charismatics, by
nature, tend to be emotionally vulnerable.
Entering into the affect of a worship song comes very naturally to them
and it remains one of the unique powerful qualities of praise and worship
music.
This
vulnerability – this nakedness of soul – is a prerequisite for the worshipper
who seeks to engage with God through these simple praise and worship
songs. It is one of the reasons why
freedom of physical expression is a mark of this kind of worship. People who will not risk the loss of their
dignity through vulnerable actions will likely never fully experience the
richness of worship that praise and worship offers.
That is a lot to ask of
non-Charismatics. For contemporary
praise and worship music to resonate genuinely with the worshipper, there must
be a commitment to the song – entering into its message and dwelling
there. This is not idolatry of the
song. Such a commitment – a giving of
oneself – is meditation and contemplation of God’s holy character and
works. It is why so many contemporary
songs repeat over and over again. For
the one who has “entered into the song,” that is
not a problem at all. For those who
cannot release themselves into the song, repetition is annoying because it is
not meaningful.
Still, non-Charismatics
should be encouraged to grow in their emotional vulnerability. Biblical physical engagement such as lifting
hands can be very helpful in releasing the emotional reserve of worshippers. The early days of the Charismatic Movement
were very divisive, cultivating a great amount of fear among many
Evangelicals. For the most part, the
fear has abated. Lifting your hands in
worship, moving your feet just a bit, or shedding a tear doesn’t make one a
Charismatic. But those actions can be
manifestations of a more fully-orbed and biblical worship experience. Far beyond the relevance of the folk-rock
style of praise and worship music, that is the great gift of the movement.
Problems with the Praise & Worship Movement
Contemporary praise and
worship music, with all of its significant benefit in emotional engagement and
cultural relevance, has a number of challenges and pitfalls. Wise pastors and worship leaders will guide
their congregations through these potentially dangerous tendencies and
practical difficulties.
There is a sense among many
in ministry leadership today that congregational singing is in demise. That may be so. Historically, there has always been an ebb
and flow in the vitality of church music.
Critics of the praise and worship genre would pin the blame for the
demise of hymn-singing on the growth of “praise choruses.” There may be something to that criticism, to
be honest. Hymn singing in the last two
hundred years was generally supported by an organ – a wind instrument that
sustains pitches much like the human voice.
Praise and worship music has no such vocal support from the
instruments. Instead, vocal support for
the congregation comes from singers amplified by microphones.
The demise of
the hymnal is also problematic. With
hymn singing, the people in the congregation could have the music in front of
them and even if the singer couldn’t read music, they could tell if the pitch
in the melody was going up or down.
Furthermore, able musicians in the congregation were able to read and
sing in four-part harmony. (That’s how I
learned to read bass clef.) The loss of
congregational four-part harmony is real with the emergence of praise
music. A hymnal also provides the
opportunity for the worshipper to linger with a text if a phrase or word
resonates in his or her spirit. The incessant
progression of song slides provides no such opportunity for textual contemplation. (I confess that a favorite practice of mine
when I was younger and oblivious to my rudeness was to explore the hymnal when
the sermon was boring. Not really such a
bad option.) Finally, hymnals have long
served alongside of the Bible as a wonderful aid to personal devotion. That is certainly my testimony. With the disappearance of hymnals from our
churches, we are losing something very significant. I, along with many others, grieve the loss.
But the demise of
congregational singing should not be laid entirely at the feet of the new
musical genre. The fault, I believe,
lies squarely on the shoulders of unreflective musical leadership that
disempowers congregational singing.
Worship leaders need to understand their role in leading the congregation
in musical worship. Too often, the
leader’s concern is in producing a certain sound with the band rather than
engaging the people. There are many
things that will cause a congregation to stop singing.
Worship leaders and sound
technicians need to be aware that if members of the congregation cannot hear
their own voice singing, most will stop and just listen. The band may be musically excellent and the
songs eminently sing-able, but if the sound is too loud, most people will
disengage. In order to sing and tune
one’s voice to another (the essence of congregational singing) the singer needs
to hear his own voice. There is, of
course, a balance here. If all one hears
is his own voice, as in an acoustically dead room, most will stop singing,
unless, of course, they are confident soloists who like to show off a bit. But if a worshipper can hear his voice
blending with others, the effect is inviting and pleasing. Each venue and each congregation is
different. What may be too loud on the
decibel meter in one place may be just fine in another. I have observed, unfortunately, when I’ve
raised this topic with some leaders, they’ve ignored my concerns, only to have
their people disengaged. I understand
the desire for energy produced by loud music.
I, too, enjoy the feel of sub-woofers thumping on my chest. But leaders should be careful to consider the
effect of too much sound and monitor their congregation closely. If they are not singing, perhaps the volume
is too high.
Another reason
why singers may disengage is because the song is in the wrong key (too high or
too low) or the range is too wide. Chris
Tomlin’s songs, which are generally very sing-able, usually need to be keyed
down a minor third in order for most people to be able to sing the notes. Also, leaders should be very careful not to
press the range of a song much beyond an octave. There are, of course, exceptions. In
Christ Alone, by Stuart Townend and Keith Getty,
is very sing-able and regarded as one of the best songs in the last twenty
years. Nevertheless, it has a range of
an octave and a fourth. There are many
exceptions, but leaders need to be discerning about sing-ability.
Another musical
characteristic of praise and worship songs that may present a challenge is the
employment of syncopation...
The preceding excerpt was from a chapter in Strategic Portraits: People and Movements That Shaped Evangelical Worship. The chapter begins with the author's personal recollections of the Jesus People Movement in California and how it served as the launching pad for what would become the Praise and Worship Movement. The rest of the chapter explains the strengths and challenges of Praise and Worship music with suggestions for renewal. You can purchase Strategic Portraits at Amazon in print or Kindle format.
[1] Robert Webber commented several times at
The Institute for Worship Studies that Chuck Fromm, founder of Worship Leader Magazine, considered
praise and worship music to be a “new sacrament.” Worship historians Swee Hong Lim and Lester
Ruth affirm and develop the concept further in their book, Loving on Jesus: A Concise History of Contemporary Worship (2017).
[2] Ron Eggert, ed. Tozer on Christian Leadership: A 366-Day Devotional, (Camp Hill,
PA: Wing Spread Publishers, 2001), June 3.
[3] The idea of emotional engagement in music
is not new, of course. Music in certain
classical eras, such as the Romantic and Baroque periods, required it. Music in the Baroque period, in particular,
expressed a specific “affect” in each piece.
Each movement in Handel’s Messiah,
for example, requires engagement of a singular, or in some arias, two
affects. Good performance practice
requires emotional commitment. Though
much less sophisticated, I suggest that praise and worship songs are similar in
this regard.
[4] Bert Polman, “Praise the Name of Jesus”
in The Message in the Music, ed. By
Robert Woods and Brian Walrath (Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 2007) p. 133.
[5] I have found syncopation to be a problem
with many liturgical and traditional churches in the upper Midwest who have a
strong hymn and choral tradition (Reformed and Lutheran, in particular). Syncopation is not a usual part of their
musical vocabulary and congregations tend to “straighten out” the rhythms
naturally.
Comments
Post a Comment