Emeritus Professor of Music Arthur Birkby has been on the faculties
of Westminster College, the Philadelphia Conservatory, Western Michigan
University, the University of Wyoming, and Biblion College & Seminary.
Dr. Birkby has performed as concert organist in over 100 cities of Europe
and the U.S. His article should not be construed as a condemnation of all
contemporary Christian music, but rather as a call to carefully evaluate
the music we use to glorify the Lord.
Hymns: The Best for the Master
By Arthur Birkby
Since the ninth century A.D., churches were virtually the only
centers where historically significant music composition and
performance were actively pursued. In contrast, today's important music
events occur more often in concert halls, universities, and arenas.
Musical masterworks have endured because their composers, having
intuitive ideas, inherent talent, and prodigious industry, were
influenced by, and applied fundamental principles of design and structure.
Even those composers who introduced what must have seemed novel
or iconoclastic inroads into music, were steeped in the traditions of
their predecessors, and did not abandon the need for discipline when
putting forth innovative kinds of form, harmony, melody, rhythm, or style.
The church's association with music since antiquity is easily
understood. Music is mentioned many times in the Bible. As early
as Genesis 4:21 we read of Jubal being the father of those who play
the harp and flute. Other instruments mentioned in the Bible
include the horn, organ, timbrel, tabret, lyre, trumpet, sistrum, and
psaltery; but most of these had little resemblance to today's instruments.
Other Scriptural examples regarding music abound, such as Exodus
15:1-18, describing Moses leading a responsorial song celebrating
Israel's deliverance through the Red Sea. Details of early temple music
are described in I Chronicles 15.
Temple musicians were employed by many of Israel's kings.
One music director, Heman, and his fourteen sons were responsible
for the temple's choral music. The temple choir contained 288
highly trained singers who wore white linen robes. During Solomon's
reign, there were 4,000 instrumentalists in addition to the singers (I
Chron. 23:5).
The musicians who were engaged in providing music for
worship services were skilled, as evidenced in I Chronicles 15:22, II
Chronicles 34:12, and Psalm 33:3. Attempting to maintain a high level of
music in today's services, many churches hire well-paid professionals
who enhance worship by bringing dignified, reverent praise to the Lord.
It must be noted that "dignified" or "reverent" does not preclude
jubilant or energetic musical offerings. Sobriety and dignity do not
necessarily imply gloom and wretchedness.
Unlike big city "mainline" churches with impressive budgets
for music, many congregations rely on their own members to
provide worship music without monetary reward. When faced with this
situation, they should strive to select musical participants who are
competent as well as willing.
By way of analogy, if a preacher were unable to preside at a
service for one reason or another, and a substitute were required, it would
be patently inappropriate to ask a layperson whose speech was
unintelligible, ungrammatical, or crude, and who had no knowledge of
Scripture, to preach the sermon. Even worse would be a situation in
which a person with limited Bible knowledge, and having a liberal,
non-doctrinal view of Scriptural truth, would be asked to preach to a
congregation of believers who expect a spiritual gospel message.
Let us see how this might apply to music. The lack of worthy
music in today's worship services is not always because the music
leaders are uneducated or unskilled. Rather, it is because they
themselves may lack discernment; and some feel that by appealing to an
uncultured general cross-section of society, they will attract a larger
appreciative audience.
Because of space, this article will address only congregational
singing, rather than consider other elements of music in the service.
The recent, overwhelmingly ubiquitous use of so-called "praise
choruses," or "worship songs" has led to the virtual elimination of hymnals.
The presumed justification for avoiding hymns in a book is that they
are old-fashioned, and do not address the needs of the youth. There
are several fallacious premises in this argument. Firstly, it assumes
that youthful demands are shared by mature adults. Secondly, it
suggests that hymns in the book, being "traditional," are old-fashioned.
Any perfunctory scan of a recognized, published, modern hymnal
will reveal a wealth of hymns dating from many eras, including songs
by contemporaries, and they deserve to be explored.
Hymnal contents often run the gamut from tawdry to
magnificent; but rare, indeed, can "magnificent" selections be found
among the so-called "praise" songs or choruses. There are, certainly,
some songs reflecting popular idioms that do have merit, especially
those that derive from actual, traditional folk melodies. "Praise" songs
that are banal, trivial, and lacking any redeeming qualities are rampant.
The reader may ask whether there are standards by which a
legitimate assessment of a hymn's worth may be determined. Of course!
Let us consider texts as well as musical settings. Most texts are
in some form of poetry. Poetry as an art form often has as its
purpose the creation of beauty, or perhaps the emphasis or clarification
of meaning by using rhetoric, rhyme, or meter not always
associated with mere prose.
Consider, for example, the beauty and magnificence expressed
in When I Survey the Wondrous Cross by Isaac Watts. All four
stanzas are glorious; but ponder for a moment two of the stanzas,
which state:
Forbid it, Lord, that I should boast, Save in the death
of Christ, my God! All the vain things that charm me most,
I sacrifice them to His blood.
Were the whole realm of nature mine, That were a
tribute far too small; Love so amazing, so divine, Demands
my soul, my life, my all.
Compare the above with the following popular worship chorus:
Lead me in Your everlasting way, Lead me in Your
everlasting way, Lead me in Your everlasting way, Lead me
in Your everlasting way.
Or, how about this one:
There is no God but Jehovah (16 times)
Or another one:
I love you, Lord. I love you, I love you, I love you, Lord.
Adding salt to the wound, after singing songs like these
repetitive ones, the worship teams (as they like to be called) often sing the
song a second or third time!
Now a word must be said in behalf of the music. A hymn
tune's worth cannot be justified by whether one likes it, or does not like
it; but its intrinsic value can be determined by anyone having a
background in music composition. This would include familiarity
with harmony, theory, form and analysis, counterpoint and music history.
With these points of reference, most "choruses" will be recognized
for their shallowness and their flagrant errors in the most
fundamental principles of music writing.
Composers of all ages "broke the rules," so to speak, of
writing technique. Even such greats as J. S. Bach, Chopin, Brahms,
Debussy, or Schoenberg broke the rules; but the infractions can be easily
and legitimately justified as one studies their output. When writing
music in a particular idiom, one should follow principles
characteristic of that style. The problem with the worship choruses is that they
are not stylistically unique in any way. Instead, they are based
upon "traditional" concepts, but ignore the compositional principles
that would make them acceptable.
An analogy may be made in the art of painting, where one
learns about form, composition, color, brush technique, and other
related topics. In the eras of Rubens, Raphael, Monet, Goya, and other
old masters, artists exercised their own prerogatives in their
masterpieces, as have other artists throughout history. In more recent
times, Picasso's inimitable style avoided reality, whether in a portrait or
a still life. Dali chose a fanciful dream world in which to create
his surrealistic pictures. Great artists, who dare to be different,
know thoroughly the accepted precepts of their forerunners, and are
able to convey new ideas as developments of the giants who preceded them.
If an aspiring artist today were to paint a replica of the Mona
Lisa, and add lipstick and insert a ring into her nose, the result would
be sacrilegious. That is, in essence, the kind of charade that some
of today's would-be hymn writers are foisting off on congregations.
They are unable to create something that is uniquely contemporary;
rather, they create caricatures that are often offensive, corrupting
idioms that require principles to be followed.
In centuries past, church musicians such as J. S. Bach
adapted folk songs, and even silly love songs, to be used for
congregational singing. These unpretentious ditties were modified, and garbed
in splendor, depth, and beauty appropriate for sublime texts
derived from the Scriptures. One such work is the well-known,
O Sacred Head, Now Wounded. The original musical treatment of this
tune was used in a song about a lad whose mind was befuddled
with thoughts of his ladylove. Bach enriched this melody by modifying
its harmony and rhythm so that it became a vehicle for expressing
unspeakably profound truths. In contrast, there are church song
leaders nowadays who "jazz" up traditional hymns, thereby
cheapening them rather than improving them. If one does not actually listen
to the words of a praise chorus, the music may often be more
readily identified as belonging in a night club, a skating rink, or an
MTV broadcast.
There is nothing wrong with having one's own preferences in
music in whatever genre. It is important, however, to make choices
appropriate to the environment. In worldly settings,
discriminating taste in music is of little consequence. When offering the Lord
our worship in song, only the very best befits our sacrifice of praise.
Sadly, much of what is presented today falls abysmally short of that goal.
Dr. Birkby will be happy to respond to any question you might
have regarding his comments in this article. You can write him
at: abirkby@comcast.net.