Several years ago, there was a fascinating discussion of the use of “praise songs” in worship at Mere Comments, the blog of Touchstone Magazine that I was just alerted to. Timothy Striplin, a young church musicians, had this to say:
Seizing on the idea that “He inhabits the praise of His people,” those who advocate this style of worship attempt to compensate for the loss of the catholic center of worship by emphasizing above all else an experience of the Real Presence of the Third Person of the Trinity (in each worshipper, individually, I might add) IN SUNG PRAISES.
The man or woman in the pew is supposed to “get into the mood” and let the songs “carry them away, into a personal experience of the Spirit.” The simple, repetitious words of the “worship chorus” take on the function of a mantra that can carry one into an altered state; charismatic writers have gone so far as to actually say that this is their aim, though I doubt many Evangelicals are aware of this aspect of the “Praise and Worship” tradition.
I have heard a worship leader invoke this concept–that “he inhabits the praise of his people”–as a way to get people “prepared” for worship, and I thought at the time he was using it in a Real-Presence kind of way. (The notion comes from Psalm 22:3, though only the KJV and its derivatives say “inhabits.” The others say that He is “enthroned on the praises of Israel,” which has a completely different meaning.
The “mantra” charge–the practice in Hindu and New Age meditation of repeating words over and over again to induce a sort of trance–is serious, and one that I had not thought of.
Mr. Striplin goes on to say that Christian worship requires some notion of God’s presence and he urges Christians to recover “some form” of sacramental presence in the Eucharist, if not Luther’s, at least Calvin’s.
I understand that traditions that don’t even have that must substitute something. But why would traditions that do have a sacramental understanding of Christ’s true presence go after this pale substitute? (As I recall, the worship leader that I heard go on about how God “inhabits” the praises of the people was a Lutheran.)
HT: Shane Ayers
{ 1 trackback }
{ 42 comments… read them below or add one }
I am a member of an Evangelical Baptists church ,and i have noticed and get particularly sick of the repetitious nature of the praise songs that are sung at our Thursday night worship service.Over and over with the words on a Powerpoint presentation
Yes there is preaching of the Word,there is Communion every month.We are a church here in Australia that i think is modelled on Mark Driscoll’s -without the crude lingo or sermons on the Song of Songs.
but I had not thought of the ‘mantra’ context of the singing until i read the full article,and like Dr Veith i now feel uncomfortable that it is the same process as Hindus use. I think the writer is also correct that a recovery of the the Presence of the Living God is best exemplified in the Sacrament. The problem as I see it is that Baptists and other Believer’s Churches have interpreted transubstantiation and Consubstantiation as being idolatry,when in fact it is the centreing of one’s life in the Risen Lord.
I think i will be looking for Catholic Church of the Reformed Confessions to worship at
I would think that the churches that think a view of the Sacraments that asserts Christ’s real presence is idolatry should also think that the notion of Christ’s real presence in praise songs is also idolatry. To be sure, Christ is present in His Word, where two or three gather in His name. His presence would be in the Word, not music as such, which is why the rich Biblical texts of hymns are so much better to use in worship. I don’t mean to denigrate anyone’s church, Wayne, though it is likely your pastor hasn’t thought of these issues either and might like to consider them. As for the Catholic Church of the Reformed Confessions, it sounds like the Lutheran Church of Australia to me!
I, too, had not thought of repetitive “praise” songs as mantra-like. It has given me a lot to think about. I thought of them as more mind numbing than expanding. This article helped me better understand the “contemporary” worship service (I put it in quotes because I do not think it is very contemporary). http://www.wittenburgdoor.com/your-guide-contemporary-christian-music
Some of the comments following the article hint on the repetitiousness of the music.
“But why would traditions that do have a sacramental understanding of Christ’s true presence go after this pale substitute?”
My guess is that they no longer believe their confessions, or they have never stopped to think about the wonderful mystery in any meaningful way. The weight of that mystery demands more than the fluff of pop music to carry it.
I have long considered “praise music” mantra-like and emotionally manipulative. That’s the main reason I recently left a church I otherwise liked very much, for a church that offered a more traditional service. As a writer, I’m highly sensitive to language and its uses, and the praise music just drove me nuts (I didn’t mind the music, but the words). I was making excuses to miss church, just to avoid it.
And then there are the songs that sound like Muslim worship:
Let us break bread together on our knees,
let us break bread together on our knees.
When I fall on my knees with my face to the rising sun,
O Lord, have mercy on me.
Let us drink wine together on our knees,
let us drink wine together on our knees.
When I fall on my knees with my face to the rising sun,
O Lord, have mercy on me.
Let us praise God together on our knees,
let us praise God together on our knees.
When I fall on my knees with my face to the rising sun,
O Lord, have mercy on me.
No Christ, no cross, no Trinity, nothing uniquely ChristianOh wait, that was sung in a LCMS Lutheran church.
I get the “mantra” theme—but cannot the same be said about parts of the liturgy? After memorizing the words, the mind just kind of checks out. (Cf. Orwell, Politics and the English Language)
As for the original article, there seems to be a bit of straw manning going on; Matthew 18:20 is completely missing: “For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”
More seriously, why are we bringing the battleaxe when the scalpel should be the tool of choice? Lyrics aside (as many of them are hideous), can the praise song be theologically salvaged? What then, shall we do with Psalm 118?
If Lutherans believe Baptists should just cut out Communion entirely, since they have gutted it of its meaning, can other denominations say the same about Lutherans and singing (to reference my own experience, at the church I referenced above, only about half of the congregation participated anyway)?
Or is singing not even really the issue here, but merely a pretext for condemning non-Lutheran interpretations of Communion.
> My guess is that they no
> longer believe their confessions,
Confessions? What confessions? We don’t have no confessions! We ain’t gotta show you no stinkin’ confessions!
But what *does* God’s Word mean by Psalm 22:3 (“Yet you are holy, enthroned on the praises [or, dwelling in the praises] of Israel.”)? This is a sincere question.
Another lutheran blog wrote a series of articles on this some years ago:
http://confessingevangelical.blogspot.com/2004/08/sacrament-of-praise-and-worship.html
http://confessingevangelical.blogspot.com/2005/06/forgive-our-foolish-ways.html
Nemo,
Go back and read the post. I think you will see that the main thrust is actually against Lutherans who would use the music you have rightly abhored, and especially if they are in the LCMS.
If that was your experience in the LCMS then I can hardly blame you for leaving. Just know that that is not what the LCMS stands for. That being said it is becoming all too common in our circles.
As for singing, Lutherans have a long history of singing in Church. We are credited with some of the earliest hymns being introduced in the vernacular. Some congregations do better than others. However, in many parts of the world Lutheran’s are known for being very good singers. There is even a Garrison Keillor bit floating about the internet talking about that.
As for the liturgy being mantra like, I think the closest thing would be “This is the Feast.” But then it isn’t quite as repetitive as the praise songs we are talking about here. And sure maybe your mind checks out a bit, but they don’t nor are they designed to bring you to any state of ecstasy. And if you have to think about your feet in a two step, you ain’t dancing.
I have long felt that many praise songs are mantra-like with their repetitive phrases, and I’ve remarked about that in this forum. Also, many praise songs sing about Jesus as if He is a boyfriend and not the Saviour of the World.
Years ago I attended my college roommate’s pentecostal worship service. They would repeat these praise choruses over and over and over until they were in some sort of altered state.
Many praise songs also preach on how “I feel” and on what I have done and will do, and not on what Christ has done.
When we take away the hymn books and rely upon an overhead projector only, it is a dumbing down of all things musical.
My church’s praise team wants to attend a worship conference put on by the Vineyard. I am not attending and have found many websites with info on the Vineyard; but if anyone has any other info on why we should not attend, I would be grateful to hear.
Booklover,
Because they really want to go here insetad http://worshipgodconference.com/
You want to hear a praise song?
Here’s one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az3F5Q0QDk
And here’s another:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4d9RJMOP9Tw
And how about one more!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn0wYkXRj9Y
I attach these to point out that our traditional hymns, set in the context of liturgical worship are FULL of praise and awe! If you don’t get teary and full of the love of God while listening to one of these, I don’t know about you!
“Praise songs” too often come off as just too much “7/11″–seven songs sung eleven times over !
Give me the Eucharist any day!
Bror,
There’s more, but I won’t go into that right now. I’m aware of the long tradition of singing and hymn writing, and I’m glad for it. But I’m concerned that such is not the general attitude of Lutherans today—rather, they’re living in their history. Many people try to tell me what the LCMS stands for (or Lutheranism more generally). The practice is what’s lacking (in addition to agreement between them).
Booklover,
Repetitions and power points are two completely separate issues. You can’t lump them together like that. Furthermore, Scripture has its share of repetitions in songs/prayers, especially in Psalms and Revelation. Therefore, the mere presence of repetitions is not enough to condemn a song. Nor is the presence of emotion (emotionless worship may, in fact, be a problem). Whlie many places misapply and/or misuse these, I remain unconvinced that the genere is flawed.
Not personally liking or feeling comfortable with a worship style is insufficient to disqualify it—such an approach is merely another form of centering worship on what I want and feel comfortable with. It’s not about us.
I prefer hymns myself, because most of them have a biblical approach to worship, and help me to focus on our Lord and His attributes prior to the message. I also enjoy the musical aspect, and the congregational singing of parts. I hate that the next generation is not being brought up to appreciate classical Christian worship music. That being said, the move toward worship songs is largely a stylistic one, in my opinion. To equate it with Hindu-like mantra recitation is extreme. The Psalms allow for a wide range of expression in worship, and I don’t see anything in the New Testament to counter that teaching. There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism of your own denominational traditions and what you perceive as movements away from those traditions, but the unrelenting and negative criticism of other evangelical traditions, especially when that criticism is not based on Biblical text but on denominational tradition, is unedifying to the Body as a whole. It is divisive, rather than unifying.
Booklover,
I attended the Anaheim Vineyard for a number of years in the late Eighties. I was there when John Wimber preached a sermon on how God ‘taught’ the Vineyard congregation to worship. He said that when they would start to worship, the Spirit of God would descend on the congregation, but if they sang a song that was irreverent or in some way offensive to the Holy Spirit, the Spirit would ‘lift off’ of the congregation and they would have to repent and ask Him to come back. You can probably hear his telling of it on any of the Vineyard audio stuff concerning worship and ‘Power Evangelism.’
How is this any different than conjuring, or worshipping a pagan deity?
This understanding of worship is at the core of the Vineyard movement.
I could write a book about the bad theology and abuses I saw there. There were also a lot of ‘manifestations’of the apparently supernatural that couldn’t be denied.
It almost destroyed my faith and definitely destroyed the faith of many friends and acquaintances.
I once heard someone remark that the difference between the “praise songs” and Lutheran chorales is like asking someone at an elegant supper club, “Would you like the balogna or the prime rib.”
The vineyard stuff, nearly swept me away as well in high school and early college. It was just so much more exciting than the “boring” liturgy and hymns that I had learned and loved to sing when I was a young boy. With the vineyard songs (sung mostly by Lutherans around me at the time) everyone was encouraged to feel the spirit and sing meaningfully. It felt more meant (if that makes any sense) and hit me at a time when I was clamoring for meaning and significance (my own).
I am so thankful that the Lord rescued me from this very shallow and very judgmental form of Worship. I soon developed an insidious pride within me, where I at one time despised sitting by Christians who couldn’t sing well (I’m not joking), because they really ruined the “spirit” of the Worship experience for me. Although I was singing my heart out for Jesus, it literally became all about me and rapturous harmony (I remember especially liking to sit by cute girls who could sing well
– almost makes me sick just thinking about how terrible I know I can be.
And yes, I do resent those Christian ministries that have amputated the faith of many of my friends by celebrating and encouraging and teaching us to throw our whole-selves all in as a sacrifice of praise (so to speak), rather than the Biblical model of Christian worship as a radically receptive posture which God Himself creates in the sinner who has absolutely nothing to give to God, but everything to receive.
Going through that experience was formative in why I now love to rest with the congregation in receiving the Bible texts so wonderfully given as the bedrock of the Lutheran liturgy and expounded in theologically solid hymns from God’s faithful people through all the ages.
Nemo,
We have five hundred plus years of histor as “lutherans” and our histoy goes back a bit further than that even. But you are confused by the people who practice a twentieth century pentecostal form of worship? You think they represent Lutheranism?
I’ll go for the people who worship the way my Lutheran parents, grandparents, great grandparents… etc, and now my son worship.
Veith,
You wrote at #2:
As for the Catholic Church of the Reformed Confessions, it sounds like the Lutheran Church of Australia to me!
I actually laughed out loud because I had thought the same thing….
That comment brightened my day.
CL
Larry at #8:
He says that he inhabiteth the praises of Israel; because, in showing such liberality towards the chosen people, as to be continually bestowing blessings upon them, he furnished them with matter for continued praise and thanksgiving. Unless God cause us to taste of his goodness by doing us good, we must needs become mute in regard to the celebration of his praise.
Nemo @ 6 wrote:
“[...]can the praise song be theologically salvaged? What then, shall we do with Psalm 118?”
I don’t understand your ref. to Ps.118 (Easter Sunday’s appointed Psalm – filled with wonderful Christological reference to the resurrection, quotes from Ex.15, and Christ the cornerstone). If you’re referring to a repetitive Psalm (although Jewish poetry has always operated along a somewhat repetitious principle) then Ps. 136 would be the Psalm of choice.
CL
My apologies. I was looking at both of them and typed the wrong number. I meant Psalm 136.
Are you sure the mantra like character of this music is a weakness? Yes Hindu’s use repition but it is not limmited to Hindu’s and New Agers. Psalm 1 talks about meditating on God’s Word day and night. Are you sure that does not involve some repititon. There are plenty of examples of repetitive prayer in Christian tradition. The desert Fathers would often repeat a snippet of the days lection as their prayer, repeating the word again and again to remain in a state of prayerfullness. The most obvious example of repititve prayer is the Jesus Prayer of the Orthodox Church..Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on me the sinner. Even the Lord’s Prayer can be used this way or the creed. Are we sure that this is bad? Is all repititon vain repitition?
Sorry the Jesus Prayer is Lord Jesus Christ Son of God have mercy on me the sinner!
Nemo #11~~
Sovereign Grace Ministries? If that’s the same as Sovereign Grace Music, yes they are excellent. A “contemporary” sound, but with theologically rich lyrics. “Before the Throne of God Above” and “I Will Glory in My Redeemer” (Vikki Cook)are two of my faves, and I have sung them both for church.
Nemo (@21), while Psalm 136 is undoubtedly repetitive, it’s also highly instructive. Within its framework, it summarizes the creation of the world and the history of God’s mercy on the Israelites, notes God’s provision for all creatures, and reminds us that the appropriate response to all this is to give thanks. I would submit that if every repetitive praise song did that much, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Sure, there’s repetition in the psalms or the Bible in general. But rare is the praise song (in my experience) that says as much as a musical setting of a psalm or Biblical text. And if you know of such songs, then great, but that’s obviously not what’s being discussed here.
This kind of gets at what Gregory (@22) was getting at. It’s not merely repetition that’s the problem. It’s vain repetition — repeating words over and over that either say little to nothing, or believing falsely that the repetition is more acceptable or even necessary. After all, anything we call music necessarily involves repetition of some sort (including lyrics, though more at the theme or phrasing levels, involving parallels).
Booklover at #24:
Yes, Sovereign Grace Music is a part of Sovereign Grace Ministries (with which my church is associated, actually). “I Will Glory in My Redeemer” is one of my favorites as well!
i.e. Vain repetitions
It is ironic that those who press solely for contemporary choruses belittle those who love the liturgy, yet can’t abide any criticism sent their way. They call the Lord’s Prayer a vain repetition, and one will never hear the Lord’s Prayer uttered in their churches.
They call the Apostles’ Creed a vain repetition, and one will never hear it uttered in their churches either.
I think there can be a mixture of old hymns and new choruses in our churches. But in accepting the new choruses, we do not have to accept the triteness that comes with many of them. We do not have to repeat phrases over and over and enter an altered state. (How weird and un-Christian is that.) We do not have to throw out the desires and loves of our older saints in order to become “relevant.” Our young people are starving for something that is different than the world. If we try to do it the world’s way, it only turns out more mediocre anyway. As the author of the article that Dr. Veith linked to stated, “I know many many people my age and younger who long for something that won’t change every five minutes in a vain effort to remain relevant.”
In our love and acceptance of the reformed and aging hippie/drug abuser, we have accepted him and his music, while tossing out the beloved melodies and even theologies of the older saints. In the parable of the lost (prodigal) son, the father accepted the son who squandered everything, but he also turned to the stable son and said, “My son, you are always with me, and everything I have is yours.” We do not have to toss aside our old saints and their tastes in order to welcome the new. We can actually have both, if we choose intelligently, looking at the words and listening to the music.
There is a site on the web called “Church of the Lamb Songs,” which enumerated criteria for evaluation of hymns and choruses in the summer of 2006. One of their guidelines stated, “Keep in mind that there are many good songs that are simply better suited for informal gatherings around a campfire or other small group sing-along, than in a Sunday morning corporate worship service.”
i.e. PowerPoint
The article to which Dr. Veith referred said “The implication was that any church that fails to use PowerPoint is ‘dead.’”
Yes, worship teams are actually making this claim—we will not “grow the church” or remain “vital, alive, and relevant” unless we use these “innovations.”
I see nothing wrong with using the PowerPoint for some choruses and the hymnal for other hymns. The problem is that when a church does both, they often eventually gravitate to using “only” the PowerPoint and discarding the hymnal. Here are other problems:
1. A congregation that reads only from a PowerPoint reads only the words, and not the written music. Gradually a congregant loses his ability to read music. This furthers the musical dumbing down of our Christian generation.
2. When the written page no longer is the master, the songleader becomes the master. This means that one doesn’t defer to the written page to “see how it goes,” but one defers to the radio to “see how it goes.” No one really knows how to play it because the notes aren’t there, so they have to go by memory from what they’ve heard on the radio. Songs on the radio come and go. Hymns in hymnals generally stick around for awhile.
3. When the words on PowerPoint are the master and the written music on the page is not, the songleader, who is generally not a musician, tells the pianist, who is a musician, how to play it; i.e. how it sounds on the radio. Since the pianist is a musician and is used to playing the music that is written, this causes unneeded conflict.
There is nothing inherently wrong with the PowerPoint, but it is just one more way in which we are trying to remain relevant to the world, but are really defeating ourselves. You can find a PowerPoint anywhere. You can’t find a precious hymnal everywhere.
Another example of strange “relevance” is the “stage” that the worship team “performs” on. You can find a “stage” anywhere in the world. But you can only find an altar in church. I have many other weary “worship team” examples, but this is already too long.
I’ve gone to a lot of different kinds of churches. When I attended a charismatic church for awhile, the order of service went something like: 1. open with praise and worship songs; 2. offering; 3. Teaching (sermon); Prayers and intercessions, often with people speaking in tongues, having “words of knowledge”, and “getting healed”. I don’t ever remember communion being offered there, but it was a long time ago, and maybe I just have forgotten.
The pastor once said, I think, something to the effect that the praise and worship at the beginning was to set the tone for the rest of the service. That is, the opening songs were very peppy and upbeat, with people even dancing to them. But eventually, the tempo slowed to the more melodic, perhaps mantra-like, songs that got people calmed down and focused. I don’t know that I think this is all bad. Music is by its nature a motivator. It can make you want to dance or march, and much of it is written with those things in mind. Or, music can make you want to calm down and focus, and that may be what we Lutherans, in our way, strive for. While I find a lot to criticize praise and worship services for, and I really hate the repetitive nature of a lot of their lyrics (can’t any of these people write a second verse?), I guess we may make too much of this.
Pr. Lindemood:
I regret that I am one of those bad singers in the congregation. The trouble with good singers, is they don’t understand their function in congregational singing, which is for the strong to lead the weak. (this is NOT the same function as the choir singers, which is to generate the best music possible) When singing in the congregation you good singers should sing the melody. Sing it loud. Give people like me something to follow as best we can, and above all, drown me out. My experience is that good singers don’t like to hear this, because they don’t enjoy singing the melody in unison very much, especially as it fails to impress pretty girls with good voices. But singing the melody in unison is what the congregation should be doing. If you want to harmonize, join the choir.
If I may (as usual) come to a sort of defence of Baptists–in their Second Great Awakening fervor (and blindness), Baptists have neglected their noble traditions (the same can be said about several mainline Protestant denominations still within the Neo-Evangelical fold). As I have often pointed out to Shane and others who hold a high view of the sacraments, Luther wasn’t the only one who argued against Zwingli’s view of the Lord’s Supper; the notable Balthasar Hubmaier did as well (and on much of the same grounds). When Baptists became wrapped up into a more “democratic faith” and fell to Arminianism, they were left extremely vulnerable to this experiential trash that we are faced with today. A thinking Baptist often finds himself at odds with the mainstream of his fellows. Anyone up for the First Sacramental Baptist Church?
Kerner, perhaps I should have specified how much I appreciate congregational and unison singing again. Your comments are very instructive though. Yes, that’s exactly what strong singers ought to enjoy doing, in fact I recommend they sing out strongly the first 2-3 stanzas and then back off to hear the beauty of all the voices together with their own voice blending in underneath, often this can be blended with the particular words and phrases to emphasize certain points that come to the fore in one’s own mind and experience. I personally love good long hymns with lots of verse theological development. Lot’s of folks in the congregation are glad that I don’t always choose the 10-14 versers
Thank you, Patrick Kyle and Bryan Lindemood, for your input on the Vineyard. I would like to hear more if that is possible. Maybe you’ll write that book? Or there’s a website?
Kerner @ 31:
Thanks for your comments. I am a church organist and I love unison singing; it allows me to improvise on the harmonies at the organ during congregational song and this allows me to better reflect the tone and timbre of the words. If the harmony is set by the book, I have far fewer options in terms of “word-painting”. Strong, unison singing is also a wonderful thing to behold. As a singer though, I love to harmonise as a tenor.
CL
Yes Bart that would be beaut to have a First Sacramental Baptist Church. I can see my brother’s friend- a Reformed Baptist minister – choking on his Westminster Confession whilst eating porridge; my church would probably sing praise songs over and over and … from the book Hymns Awful and Murdered,and think the hymn
“Let us break bread together on our knees,
let us break bread together on our knees.
When I fall on my knees with my face to the rising sun,
O Lord, have mercy on me.” is a significant Communion song.
when i mentioned at one Communions service that i had been a member at a Lutheran Church around the corner form my church, i was told ‘well you are better off here now”.I thought so but gee the triumphalism instead of the sanctity of the service starts to get to you. oh yes they want people to form accountability groups” ie confessing to each other. strewth ,if I want to do that i go and speak to the Pastor as is still practised in the LCA
satan is really clever at making things seem to be all bout God and Jesus when what we are doing/thinking is really ALL about us.
“I would think that the churches that think a view of the Sacraments that asserts Christ’s real presence is idolatry should also think that the notion of Christ’s real presence in praise songs is also idolatry.” (Comment #2)
Dr. Veith, the former Vineyardites who have commented have touched on this, but to bring out a crucial and disturbing point to this discussion: most neo-evangelicals that participate in this sort of worship and pseudo-sacramentalism are concentrating their worship and the efficacy of the worship chorus “sacrament” not on Christ, nor on the Father, as is the biblical pattern, but on the Holy Spirit. There is often theological confusion even in the lyrics as to the roles of the persons of the Trinity.
Thank you for the links to “Praise My Soul, The King of Heaven,” DrJoan #13. Breathtakingly beautiful. . .
A little Word, a little piece of bread, a little sip of wine…
it’s just never enough.
We’d rather have that ‘feeling’ rather than that ‘trust’.
Re: Steve Martin #41
To which I have replied that we are receiving the forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation that God has located in that body and blood. And that’s a good feeling.
Doesn’t seem so small, then.
Way to go, Dan!