The past 40 years in the history of the church have been marked by fighting and disagreement over forms and styles of music used in worship. This, however, is not a unique event in the history of the Church. As Rev. Tim Carson, pastor and worship renewal workshop leader, notes in his book, Transforming Worship, “… the reformation of [worship] is not a new project, one unique to our time. It is the continuation of a tradition that is continually modified.”¹ Carson’s statement implies that worship is based in tradition and yet is adapted by succeeding generations. I believe that worship is a means of communication between God and the worshiper and is an important activity that must continue to adapt itself to speak to the hearts and minds of modern Christians. In this paper, I will argue that there is no one style of worship that is absolutely correct. Rather, as I will show, there are a variety of musical styles suitable for worship. I will begin with a brief overview of the current debate and then consider the importance of worship to the Christian faith. Finally I will examine criteria for what enables effective worship and then demonstrate that many types of music can achieve these criteria.

Carson’s idea of reforming and renewing tradition echoes my point of view, especially when he says that “Hegemony in worship style no longer exists. No single kind of music has a corner on mediating religious truth. … Then again, this is exactly what Christians have faced throughout the centuries. It has been the source of both building traditions and reforming them.”² Notice that Carson writes “reforming” instead of recreating or beginning anew. In my opinion, the history and traditions of the past are a necessary element for the continuity of the Christian faith and also a link with those who have gone before. Our theology has been handed down through many generations and through the work of numerous councils, committees and church governing bodies who have wrestled with issues of Christian theology for centuries. We should take their viewpoints and decisions into serious consideration before making any substantial changes in worship or theology. As Carson notes, the current debate over worship style is not a new problem. Each generation has had to face its own set of issues and concerns. At the turn of a new century we are again dealing with the issue of how to worship.

Much of the debate in worship style has been characterized by two extremes, which is often the case in any heated, emotional argument. There are those who believe that only traditional music, usually meaning a hymn or other composition written in a traditional hymn style, is the proper expression for Christian worship. On the other side of the debate, there are those who believe that the tradition of hymnody in the church has grown stale and needs to be reinvigorated with fresh songs written in a popular style. A large part of this second argument seems to be centered around the idea of appealing to popular culture and making worship and its music relevant to 21st century people. An examination of the history of this debate is appropriate.

In the 1960s, America was experiencing intense cultural change. The Vietnam War, the civil rights movements, and other cultural upheavals created a time when an entire generation of Americans began to question the values and truths of their elders. Change was in the air and had been in the making for several years. In 1963, the Second Vatican Council (commonly referred to as Vatican II) issued several documents meant to reform worship and bring Catholic Christians into full participation in the liturgy. Among the documents that were issued was the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, which specifically allowed for the vernacular to be used in the Mass and opened the way for a variety of musical expression to enable worship. The Roman Catholic church was the first major Christian body of the 20th century to officially begin the process of reforming worship.

Vatican II was only the beginning of a parallel change between church culture and American popular culture. Thomas Long, Bandy Professor of Preaching at the Candler School of Theology, summarizes:

… this worship earthquake in the Roman Catholic world set off massive aftershocks among Protestants. The Catholic reforms challenged Protestants to a fundamental rethinking of their own worship as well, and within a decade of the appearance of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy most of the ‘mainline’ denominations in North America had become participants in exciting ecumenical discussions about worship and had developed dramatically fresh worship resources. United Methodists, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and others all created new worship books, and one of the most remarkable characteristics of these resources is how similar they are to each other…³

The immediate results of Vatican II were the use of the vernacular in Roman Catholic worship and an explosion of new hymns, songs and other musical material for use in the liturgy. As Long observes, these changes were not limited to the Catholic Church, as they also created a new ecumenical dialog between the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches. With this sharing of ideas, changes in the Catholic liturgy began to influence the Protestant churches. As Carson observes, “Protestants of the 1960s and 1970s often took their musical and liturgical cues from their reforming Catholic brothers and sisters.”⁴ We find that in addition to a completely new style of music, for the first time, guitars, drums, and rhythm sections began to be heard on a regular basis in both Roman Catholic and in mainline Protestant worship.

Often, it seems to me that the beginning of any new movement is marked by experimentation, most of which will fail, while the best typically endures and rises to the top. Many of the new songs written as a result of the Vatican II reforms followed the popular folk music idiom of the time. One of the best examples of this style is the Glory and Praise songbook published by Oregon Catholic Press. The songs are simple in style and lyrics, presenting at most one idea or merely an aspect of worship. Example 1 is the refrain from the song this collection is named for. It is an up-tempo piece best suited for guitar or rhythm section.

Example 1. Dan Schutte, Glory and Praise to Our God, mm 1-16.⁵

These folk-style songs are not the deep theological narratives presented in a traditional hymn. Hymns typically have a sturdy melody with multiple stanzas expressing a complete story. We can see in example 2 a modern poem by Herman Stuempfle set to a traditional hymn tune. It narrates the entire sower’s parable found in Matthew chapter 13.

Example 2. Herman Stuempfle, A Sower’s Seed, mm. 1-9.⁶

Unlike the traditional hymns, what the folk songs did provide, however, was a more emotional connection between worship and the worshiper. Over time, other pieces that grew out of this style were written as a brief, single-line song, often referred to as a chorus or praise chorus, as shown in example 3.

Example 3. Paul Baloche, Open the Eyes of My Heart, mm. 1-8.⁷

As Protestants began to adopt and adapt these pieces and their styles, they grew into the praise chorus movement, primarily associated with the charismatic and independent churches. While often shallow in theology and content, these short songs are not without merit. Dr. Robert Webber, founder of the Institute in Worship Studies, believes that the “contemporary [praise] chorus movement has played an important role in recovering the element of praise, and it has gifted the church with many new songs that can help us fulfill our role as the people of praise.”⁸

In my view, however, a steady diet of praise choruses does not provide for healthy or whole worship. Authors Barry Liesch and Marva Dawn compare them to fast food. Dr. Liesch, professor of music at Biola University in California, notes: “[praise] choruses excel at expressing celebration and intimacy but, in general, lack intellectual rigor and fail to offer a mature exposition of the broad range of biblical doctrines. … There’s very little emphasis on corporate confession or repentance. And the cost of discipleship and need for perseverance in the Christian life get scant attention.” Clearly it is not enough to base worship solely on this genre. There is a lack of theological substance. So why not turn to traditional hymnody exclusively?

I believe that worship should engage both the heart and the mind. Traditional hymnody, with its ability to express complete and sometimes profound theological thoughts, works best at engaging the mind. On the other hand, the more subjective and simpler prose of the folk songs and praise choruses is ideal for reaching the heart. While there is room for both tradition and new forms of worship, I believe there is a need for more than the traditional hymns of previous generations. We should consider that the text and music written in our time may speak to us more clearly than that written for previous generations. That is not to say that all traditional hymn texts are outdated; however, we must carefully consider the texts in all music used in worship. Just because a hymn text is traditional does not mean it is theologically sound or even applicable to today’s world.

This process of renewal inevitably involves change, as echoed in the words of Dr. Elmer Towns, Dean of the School of Religion at Liberty University in Virginia: “True worship involves change, and it also includes that which never changes. The unchanging nature of worship doesn’t mean we never change our forms of worship, nor does it mean we never rearrange the order of service.”⁹ Taking the idea of change a step further, in his book Ceasefire, Dr. Perry Cotham writes: “Worship always solicits a response from the worshiper. …True worship brings change. An encounter with God does not leave us the same man or woman.”¹⁰ It seems that change on multiple levels is inevitable if we truly encounter God.

What is worship and its purpose in the life of a Christian? Cotham defines worship as “a term used for the reverent devotion, service or honor paid to God, whether by an individual or in public assembly.”¹¹ Frank Senn, noted Lutheran theologian, adds more: “[worship] is both the divine service in which God comes to his people through word and sacrament and the work of the people in which the church, in the Spirit, offers prayer, praise, and thanksgiving.”¹² Senn also defines orthodox Christian worship as Trinitarian and Christological. In the words of Marva Dawn, Lutheran theologian and educator: “[worship] is consistent with the nature of God as revealed in the Scriptures [Trinitarian] and in the person of Jesus Christ [Christological].”¹³Perhaps most directly, Dr. Constance Cherry, states: “Worship is first and foremost an encounter with the living God through Jesus Christ.”¹⁴

Like many, I believe that worship is central to the Christian experience, which means that, as enablers of worship, we as worship leaders must think carefully about changes in style and content. To further illustrate the centrality of worship, Webber gives the example of the hourglass:

Currently there is a growing awareness that worship is the central ministry of the Church: Worship is the center of the hourglass, the key to forming the inner life of the Church. Everything the Church does moves toward public worship, and all its ministries proceed from worship.¹⁵

Cotham emphasizes that “The worship of God is the most important activity of the people of God. … Worship is the chief source of empowerment of God’s people in bearing fruit of the Spirit, in servanthood and in fulfillment of the Great Commission.” ¹⁶ If worship is indeed central and “the most important activity,” worship leaders have an awesome responsibility in the planning and enabling of worship. Worship planning brings with it a heavy responsibility and requires some criteria for determining what effective worship is.

In Reaching Out Without Dumbing Down, Marva Dawn set the standard by which many measure worship. Her book is one of the most often quoted books in this debate, especially from the traditional point of view. While Dawn is quite conservative in her opinion, I do believe that the standard she sets is an ideal that all Christian worship should strive for, regardless of the musical style involved. If we examine some of her criteria in detail, we will find that style is not the critical factor.

Dawn believes that worship should be subversive and writes “[worship] listens to the needs of those to whom it reaches out but offers them more than they think they want in the fullness of Christ’s answer to their unfelt and deeper needs.”¹⁷ This idea suggests that simply giving people what they want is not enough. As an example, we may feel like eating fast food every day, but we know that over time, it is unhealthy and lacks the nutrition that we need. Turning to the world of pop culture, we might choose to base worship on the popular musical style. This choice, however, causes us to lose our connection with the past. Due to the shallowness in the text of many popular songs and their lack of theological content, the beliefs and traditions of the Christian experience are not passed on to the next generation. We lose part of our identity with the historic church. Consider the text of this popular praise song, which presents a pleasant image, but very little theological content:

Down the mountain, the river flows and it brings refreshing wherever it goes.
Through the valleys and over the fields, the river is rushing and the river is here.
The river of God sets our feet to dancing,
the river of God fills our hearts with cheer.
The river of God fills our mouths with laughter
and we rejoice for the river is here.¹⁸

Another issue that arises when popular music is used for worship is its reliance on the first-person perspective and its focus on how the individual worshiper feels. We can see this in the text from Martin Smith’s popular song, I Could Sing of Your Love Forever:

Over the mountains and the sea your river runs with love for me,
And I will open up my heart, and let the Healer set me free.
I’m happy to be in the truth, and I will daily lift my hands,
For I will always sing of when your love came down.
I could sing of your love forever. ¹⁹

This brings us to Dawn’s second point which is: “the key to true worship is for God to be its subject.”²⁰ We, as worshipers, are not the subject of worship, nor are we the focus. I do believe that subjectivity has a place in worship and that expressing our reaction to encountering God in worship is appropriate at times. The subjective, however, should be balanced with an objective focus on God .

Dawn lastly observes that worship must have a passion for the Gospel: “God’s people will fulfill their vocation for the culture’s sake only if we can communicate effectively who we are, what we believe, and what difference that can make.”²¹ While preaching and teaching are crucial in the church’s methods for communicating its beliefs, I believe that music must play a supporting, if not central role. Praise choruses and popular music may have their place at certain points during worship, but they often cannot effectively communicate what we believe in deep theological terms. If worship is indeed a central and vital aspect of the Christian experience, how are we to enable the worship of Christians in the twenty-first century? Again, from Marva Dawn:

Enthusiasts for contemporary worship are right in seeking to reach out to persons in the culture around us and in rejecting tradition that has grown stale. Those who value the Church’s worship heritage are right to question the faithfulness and integrity of many contemporary worship forms and to seek a noticeable difference in worship that underscores the Church’s countercultural emphasis. Only in a dialectical tension of tradition and reformation can we ask better questions to insure that worship is consistent with the nature of God as revealed in the Scriptures and in the person of Jesus Christ. ²²

Again, we face the question of “why not use traditional music exclusively?” I believe that modern Christians need a connection between what the saints of old experienced and believed and what the reality of modern life brings. While we share many of the same basic problems and issues in today’s society, we are not 1st century Christians. This indicates to me that there is, to a degree, a need to make worship and its music relevant, and to allow for both subjective and objective expressions of worship. Rather than choosing between the polar opposites of worship style, traditional or contemporary, the Church must find a way to use the best of both, melding elements of each as a path towards the mission of the Church. I agree with Weber’s statement that “The answer is not to perpetuate division in the church but to find new and creative ways of working together to create a style of worship that incorporates both the old and the new.”²⁴ Thomas Long describes this as a “third way” between the two sides:

I had the strong feeling that many congregations had managed to remain firmly within the trajectory of historic Christian worship and yet had fashioned worship that is genuinely responsive to the present cultural environment and is accessible, attractive, and hospitable to religious seekers and questers outside the church.²⁵

In practice, there have always been a wide variety of worship styles, even within a single denomination. Using style as the sole criteria creates an either/or dilemma and can cause significant problems as Dr. Cherry explains, “Pursuing a worship style fails at the practical level because style is a moving target. Styles never stay the same. …I suggest there is a better question to ask: What kind of worship helps people encounter God? This question will lead us away from preferences and toward the true goal of worship.” ²⁶

Note Cherry’s use of the word “preferences.” Recall that Marva Dawn wrote that worship should give people more than they think they need. If we are to believe that worship is an encounter with God, there is more at stake here than simply choosing music that a congregation prefers to sing. If we accept the analogy of praise choruses as fast food, then we might compare preferences to comfort food. A balanced diet requires more than what is convenient or what we may feel like eating. There is a need for more substantial nourishment at times. However, it would be a mistake to believe that a particular style of music is inherently right or wrong for worship, because this idea ignores the local community and its heritage. For example, what may be stylistically appropriate for a primarily Hispanic congregation may not work with an African-American congregation.

One could also use the copyright and create a demarcation date between what is acceptable and what is not. To use date of publication as the sole criteria would ignore modern 20th and 21st century acclaimed hymn text writers such Brian Wren, Sylvia Dunstan, Fred Pratt Green and Thomas Troeger, all of whom have published fresh, compelling, and thoughtful texts that are easily used with traditional hymn tunes. Ultimately, I believe that worship leader David Montgomery in his book, Sing a New Song, gets to the heart of the matter: “Surely what is biblically faithful, doctrinally helpful, God-honoring and culturally rooted is what should govern our choice rather than congregational acceptance.”²⁷ The choice should not be between old and new or traditional and modern, but choosing the best of everything that is available.

I believe Montgomery’s statement requires several things of us as worship leaders. First, if we are to choose music that is related to doctrine and theology, we must know what it is that our particular denomination teaches and believes. It is not enough as worship leaders to choose music from a worship planning book list as though we are ordering from a take-out menu. It is imperative that we know and understand our denomination’s theology and belief system so that the music we choose is doctrinally correct. Further, whether one’s church follows the lectionary or simply relies on a sermon series, worship must be a holistic experience where the music, readings, preaching and other activities in worship serve ideally to reinforce each other. Good and effective worship does not happen by accident. It is the result of careful planning.

The other part of Montgomery’s statement is “culturally rooted.” As if intentional planning and understanding of doctrine is not enough, I believe we must know the community we find ourselves in. Referring to the ideas from Dawn and Cherry regarding a congregation’s preference, the only way of knowing what those are requires us to get to know the people who make up the faith community we serve. Knowing what is preferred or rooted in the local community culture comes about only through personal relationships and a history with a particular group of people. Obviously what one group may see as traditional versus contemporary may have a completely different connotation with a congregation in a neighboring church. What is stylistically or culturally relevant and appropriate is ultimately tied to the local community. We cannot, therefore, let ourselves off the hook by following a stereotypical or predefined either/or path to worship planning. Long’s idea of a “third way” requires a great deal of work from us. We must find our own way based on the community in which we serve. This may require us to use many different styles of music and music from different periods of time or even different cultures to make the worship experience a cohesive whole. Dr. Towns sums this up well:

New music should be introduced in a worship service for the right reasons. New music should not be sung simply because it is new. Nor should older songs be omitted simply because they are old. Rather, the selection of music for the worship service should be based on the theme and focus of worship in that service. The songs selected should help the congregation worship some aspect of the greatness of God, regardless of when they were written.²⁸

Finding our own way, however, does not mean we must walk in the dark or go where none has trod before. Given the tremendous role that I believe music serves in worship, the music must be chosen with care, using doctrine and the grounding of both the local worshiping community and the historical church itself. The wisdom of the historic church fathers and composers of by-gone eras should not be discarded simply because of its age, as Towns brings to our attention.

Dawn reminds us that the best place to start is with what we already have: “Both Wesley and Luther wrote new music to supplement the musical heritage they already had, a faith tradition passed on from one generation to another. … real creativity is impossible without the grounding in truth that tradition conveys.”²⁹ In my view, tradition must be renewed and reformed. Luther and Wesley, two of the most important reformers in the history of the church, both based their reforms of theology and music on the existing traditions of the historic church. They sought to improve upon what they had instead of throwing out everything that had gone before.

Thus, the blending of new and old has a historic basis in the reformation of the church. We find ourselves at a time in the history of the church when some traditions are passing away or being renewed, while new traditions are in the process of being created. In the future, we are likely to see some of the practices of the past existing alongside new forms. Byars describes it well:

… it will be possible to hear the sound of the organ, but not impossible to hear the sounds of percussion instruments as well. Some of the music will sound like the nineteenth century, or the sixteenth, or the second, and some will sound like the late twentieth century or the early twenty-first. Some will make the most sophisticated musicians proud, and other music will gladden the hearts of the same musicians because they understand that the music of worship is first and foremost not for performance, but for enabling the people’s song.³⁰

Byars’ mention of performance is critical. While we must do all that we can to provide excellence in worship, at the same time, we as worship leaders must be transparent and not place ourselves between worshipers and the God that we worship. Multiple styles can indeed exist within a worshiping body of Christians. It takes a great deal of planning and effort to coalesce these various styles of music, artwork and drama into a worship experience, but it can be done. The result of effective worship planning creates a renewal of mind, body and spirit of the worshiper. We should not dispense with tradition, but build upon it. If worship is indeed the “key to forming the inner life of the church,” as Webber states, we must do all we can to provide the best of all forms of art to enable the worship of the people.

Footnotes

1. Timothy L. Carson, Transforming Worship (St. Louis, MO: Chalice Press, 2003).
2. Ibid., 29.
3. Thomas G. Corp Author Alban Institute Long, Beyond the Worship Wars: Building Vital and Faithful Worship (Bethesda, MD: The Alban Institute, 2001).
4. Carson, Transforming Worship.
5. Dan Schutte, Glory and Praise to Our God (Chicago, IL: New Dawn Music, 1976).
6. Herman Stuempfle, A Sower's Seed (Chicago, IL: GIA Publications, 2000).
7. Paul Baloche, Open the Eyes of My Heart (Mobile, AL: Integrity's Hosanna! Music, 1997).
8. Robert Webber, Enter His Courts with Praise: A Study of the Role of Music and the Arts in Worship (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997).
9. Elmer L. Towns, Putting an End to Worship Wars (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 1997).
10. Perry C. Cotham, Ceasefire: Ending Worship Wars with Sound Theology & Plain Common Sense (Orange, CA: New Leaf Books, 2002).
11. Ibid.
12. Frank C. Senn, New Creation: A Liturgical Worldview (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 2000).
13. Marva J. Dawn, Reaching out without Dumbing Down: A Theology of Worship for the Turn-of-the-Century Culture (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1995).
14. Todd E. Johnson, ed., The Conviction of Things Not Seen: Worship and Ministry in the 21st Century (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2002).
15. Robert Webber, Planning Blended Worship: The Creative Mixture of Old and New (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998).
16. Cotham, Ceasefire: Ending Worship Wars with Sound Theology & Plain Common Sense. The Great Commission in the words of Jesus as recorded in Matthew Mt. 28:18-20: “Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world” (ASV).
17. Dawn, Reaching out without Dumbing Down: A Theology of Worship for the Turn-of-the-Century Culture.
18. Andy Park, The River Is Here (Franklin, TN: Mercy/Vineyard Publishing, 1994).
19. Martin Smith, I Could Sing of Your Love Forever (Brentwood, TN: EMI Christian Music, 1994).
20. Dawn, Reaching out without Dumbing Down: A Theology of Worship for the Turn-of-the-Century Culture., 287.
21. Ibid., 295.
22. Ibid., 93.
23. Ibid., 70.
24. Webber, Enter His Courts with Praise: A Study of the Role of Music and the Arts in Worship.
25. Long, Beyond the Worship Wars: Building Vital and Faithful Worship.
26. Johnson, ed., The Conviction of Things Not Seen: Worship and Ministry in the 21st Century.
27. David Montgomery, Sing a New Song: Choosing and Leading Praise in Today's Church (Edinburgh, Scotland: Rutherford House and Handsel Press, 2000).
28. Towns, Putting an End to Worship Wars.
29. Dawn, Reaching out without Dumbing Down: A Theology of Worship for the Turn-of-the-Century Culture.
30. Ronald P. Byars, The Future of Protestant Worship: Beyond the Worship Wars, 1st ed. (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002).

Bibliography