On Congregational Song

Over the past few years, I have become increasingly aware of the intense polarization that is taking place in so-called mainline denominations with regard to worship styles, which are largely driven by worship music. It seems that three major camps have emerged: those advocating for something called traditional worship, those pressing for contemporary worship, and those who are generally satisfied either way. The deep division that has been caused by these worship wars is regrettable, but one small bit of encouragement has emerged from it all -- that sacred music is being taken seriously. It is heartening to know that worship music is considered to be worth a fight. What is discouraging, however, is the knowledge that often times, worship music is not considered to be worth the constructive discussion it merits.

People are sometimes quite ready to sacrifice relationships and whole communities for the sake of right worship while maintaining that their efforts are for the greater good of the church. Separate services for different styles of worship do not always allow an easy way out. In such cases, families are sometimes split down the middle with the older generation attending one service and younger members attending another. Neither does the buffet sampler method always achieve a desirable result, for it takes great skill to combine music from radically different time periods, geographical areas, and musical genres in one service. After a great deal of thought and prayer, I have come to the conclusion that congregations must work to find a way to have faithful worship for all people, regardless of the size of membership or ability to hold multiple services. The church is a people, and thus to create compartmentalized worship experiences is to compromise the integrity of the assembly.

In order to foster constructive dialogue within congregations about the music that is used to praise, pray, listen, and lament in worship, I would like to offer a few suggestions regarding the content and structure of such dialogue. First, we must establish that conversation within the assembly is necessary. The whole community must have the opportunity to participate in discussion, whether it be through study groups, a survey, or even a special dinner for the occasion of engaging in dialogue. Once a person with pastoral authority makes a major decision on behalf of the people without consulting the people, a certain power dynamic is established that compromises the trusting relationship. When we are in agreement that dialogue must happen, we can then think about what we want to say, and just as importantly, what we do not want to say.

On this first point I will not budge: we must divorce our conception of faithful worship from notions of taste and style. We cannot allow our personal preferences to cloud our vision when seeking to enable worship for all. It is important to keep in mind that the house of God is not a mall. We must not choose our music on the basis of style alone. We can, however, evaluate ways in which a particular hymn or song integrates into the rest of worship, and style or genre may be a factor in that discussion. But what else should we take into account? Still speaking musically, we may evaluate the degree to which the music matches the message; that is, to what extent does the sound help or hinder the transmission of the text? Is the tune strong enough to carry the message of the text? Is the music delicate enough to allow the poetic feel of the text to come through? Does the music make a mockery of the text? If a hymn text clearly speaks about anguish and lament while the tune seems more appropriate for rejoicing, one may want to question the appropriateness of that setting and seek an alternate tune for the text. Such mismatched components can easily offend the ear and the intellect.

Along similar lines, there have been instances in which tunes from extremely well-known hymns have been set to different texts. I would strongly caution liturgists and others who would choose such a hymn for worship.

1. In certain cases, to tamper with a classic will cause more uproar than to introduce a completely new hymn (think "O, For a Thousand Tongues to Sing"). You may encounter fierce resistance from certain members of the assembly who will not accept any other text but the original. To change an old favorite is risky; be prepared!
2. Even if the new text is a gem, you will want to check the lyrics and compare them to those of the old text. Even though a different text is being sung, the theology and general feel of the old text may still be implied by the tune. Consider whether the theologies of the two texts are complementary, or if it might appear as though the new is meant to overthrow the old (which may, in some cases, actually be the desired effect). The same caution goes for setting an old text to a new tune, a;though there is also great potential that a new tune will bring out aspects of the text that have henceforth gone unnoticed when paired with the old tune. Also, a new tune does not carry the baggage of old words that would be lingering in the minds of the congregation.

When considering a worship service as a whole, it will be necessary to have some thread of continuity throughout the service. This may be a theological theme, a biblical theme, particular imagery, or even a particular emotive expression, such as lament. I hesitate to use the term mood, as this seems to suggest that worship is a form of entertainment. If there is some prevailing thematic element or some other type of continuity evident in the flow of the service, it will be easier to use music from diverse genres, time periods, and ethnic or national traditions. I have experienced liturgical whiplash resulting from multicultural overload on Sunday morning with very little transition or apparent theological correlation. I have also experienced large doses of global hymnody that have worked very well due to logical placement of hymns, coherent biblical and theological themes, and recurring imagery, such as water, bread, or shepherd. It is not at all necessary to limit the music to one particular time period or genre. If all music is chosen according to a particular genre or time period, not only does the theology inherent in the texts become subordinated to musical style, but there is also created the risk of promulgating a narrow theology through the texts.

When considering the long-term effect of the music of the church, it is important to consider the theology that is being sung, the frequency with which certain hymns are sung, the variety of images used for God (or lack thereof), and other factors discussed above. Does the theology of the church's hymnody coincide with the church's mission statement? If the mission of the church is not being sung, changes need to be made. It may be useful to keep a running list of the hymns or songs that are used during worship, noting for each not only the frequency of use, but also the decade and geographical region of composition/authorship, as well as the predominant theme of the text, including images of God and instances of inclusive or exclusive language. Such a discipline could help not only in assessing the present theology of the church's hymnody, but also in shaping the church's theology of hymnody to match the current needs and mission of the church.

Once the decision has been made to incorporate new music into the worship life of a community, it is advisable to proceed with caution. The business of introducing new music is not always as simple as inserting a new hymn or song into the worship order. Both text and tune deserve to be spoken about in worship. This does not necessitate a lengthy discourse about the life of the composer/author. On the contrary, a well-worded (read: confident and, if necessary, pre-planned!), concise statement about the hymn or song would be ideal, as it should not interrupt the flow of worship. In fact, the more that words-about-hymnody can be integrated into worship, the better. For example, a preacher might choose to draw on the text for use in a prayer, or perhaps for the sermon itself. However one chooses to address the music of worship, it must be treated with the seriousness it deserves. If a person with pastoral and liturgical authority treats music as though it were as trivial as icing on a cake, and if it is clear that that person does not consider congregational song a significant or legitimate means of worship, then neither will the congregation think that what they sing matters.

Congregational song matters. In closing, I would encourage congregations, regardless of what is being sung, to heed the counsel of John Wesley, who, in his Directions for Singing, advised:

Above all sing spiritually. Have an eye to God in every word you sing. Aim at pleasing him more than yourself, or any other creature. In order to do this attend strictly to the sense of what you sing, and see that your heart is not carried away with the sound, but offered to God continually; so shall your singing be such as the Lord will approve here, and reward you when he cometh in the clouds of heaven.

Copyright 2007 Erika Hirsch. All Rights reserved. Printed with permission.

Erika Hirsch is a probationary deacon serving in Connecticut. She has written this article on congregational song to fulfill an assignment in a hymnody course taught by Thomas Troeger at Yale Divinity School.