- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (3/30)
- Next Post »D.A. Carson on Worship
Song of the Year
- 03/30/07
- 21
The band All Star United has released some good and fun songs over the years. Unfortunately I’ve sometimes found them to toe the line a little bit with their humor. On the whole, though, they write some memorable songs and songs that tend to speak to some of the trends in the Christian world. They have an album coming out in a few weeks and one of the songs is called “Song of the Year.” Written by Ian Eskelin, who does most of all of the band’s writing, it pokes fun at the trend of handing out awards for the best worship music. Here is a portion of the lyrics:
This is the song of the yearLet the message be clearI don’t need you to adore meCause it’s all about God’s glorySomething’s gone really wrongIf we’re chasing the song of the yearTestimony Testimony
Testimony Testimony
I’ll never be the same
Holy holy worthy worthy
something something something something
That rhymes with Jesus’ nameIt’s the song of the year
But God’s still unimpressed
With our radio successThis is the song of the year
Let the message be clear
I don’t need you to adore me
Cause it’s all about God’s glory
Angel choirs sing along
If it’s really the song of the year.
I think he’s onto something there. I’ve often wondered at how difficult it must be to write worship music. After all, there must be some extent to which the songwriter is always trying to write something that will be loved even more than his last big hit. When I hear the latest and greatest Chris Tomlin hit (which currently seems to be “How Great is Our God”) I wonder what he’ll write next and if it will prove to be such a popular song. I wonder if he wonders the same.
Eskelin pretty well nails a lot of what passes for worship music with his short summary: “Testimony Testimony / Testimony Testimony / I’ll never be the same / Holy holy worthy worthy / something something something something / That rhymes with Jesus’ name.” Now there is plenty of music being released these days that glories in the cross and brings honor to God. But much of it does seem to follow a formulaic, me-centered pattern. Much of it is just not worthy of the God it seeks to praise. At a recent conference John MacArthur commented on the hymns we were singing and said something to the effect that “we keep singing those old songs because no one is writing anything better.” Of course the hymns we do sing represent just a fraction of the countless thousands that were written, for only the best of them have stood the test of time. The same will prove true of the worship music being written in our day. Very few will be sung even a few years after first blowing onto the scene. Has your church sung “The Heart of Worship” lately? Didn’t think so. There are lots of good songs being written today. It’s just that we have the task of separating the small amount of wheat from the mountains of chaff. When we look to the past we find that others have already done this work for us.
I was struck by the final words of “Song of the Year”: “Angel choirs sing along / If it’s really the song of the year.” I have often wondered, during a time of worship, whether the songs we sing will find their way to heaven. Sometimes a time of worship is so intense and so beautiful that I simply can’t imagine anything could be more holy and more pure. And yet I assume that what we know and experience as worship here is only a dim reflection of what is to come. But still, if you have sat through a really good performance of Handel’s “Messiah” and the Hallelujah chorus in particular, you could certainly be forgiven for thinking that worship could hardly be more beautiful than that.
I’m going to use that as a segue to a related topic. The Ligonier Conference closed this year (as it does every year, as I understand it) with a performance of the Hallelujah chorus. This performance was based on only a few minutes of practice so it wasn’t the kind of performance that is of the highest quality. But even as the choir sang their rendition I thought to myself that pop or rock or guitar-based music just can’t capture the grandeur of this classical or baroque music. I love rock music as much as the next guy, but have to admit that it somehow just can’t quite compare to the power of a choir, an orchestra, or even a really good pipe organ. Rock music tends to rely on volume rather than grandeur. Even a not-so-great performance of the Hallelujah chorus was beautiful, at least to my ears. It is just an amazing, powerful piece of music.
All of this got me thinking today about how to discern good songs from bad. And then I thought back to a book I read a while back called Perimeters of Light, written by Elmer Towns and Ed Stetzer, both of whom are Southern Baptists. In this book they propose a seven-part music test that will help filter out songs that are unworthy of worship or inappropriate to use in worship. It goes something like this:
An Eight-Part Test
The Message Test - Does this song express the word of God? Is there a strong message and one that appeals to the new man or to the old man?
The Purpose Test - What is the purpose of this music? Was it written to lift you up or to bring you down? To make you joyful or to make you sad? Different types of song may be appropriate at different times. Obviously the very nature of music dictates that certain patterns in music have the ability to stir emotion independent of the song’s lyrical content.
The Association Test - Does the song unnecessarily identify with things, actions or people that are contrary to Scripture? An otherwise good song may have to be rejected simply because people will make inappropriate associations with it in their minds. The authors provide the example of singing “Amazing Grace” to the tune of “The Rising Sun” which is a song about drinking and gambling. As people were singing worship to the Lord they would also be thinking of the song’s original words, leading their minds to think of things that are inappropriate for a worship setting.
The Memory Test - Does the song bring back things from your past that you have left? The purpose of this test is not to guard against music that people may dislike, but to guard against music that may cause them to sin, heeding the biblical warning about not offending one’s brother. So it has less to do with taste and more to do with leading people to sin.
The Proper Emotions Test - Does the music stir our negative or lustful feelings? Amazingly enough, music does have the power, once again independently of lyric, to stir emotions to sin. If you don’t believe this, watch a room full of young people during a hard, driving rap beat, even before the words begin.
The Understanding Test - Will the listeners have a hard time understanding the message or finding the melody. Different people know and understand different types of music. People will have an easier time worshiping to a type of music that they understand. Those new believers in Papua New Guinea may have a difficult time worshiping to contemporary Christian music as they would simply not understand it. The same principle holds true with the lyrics, though I would suggest to a lesser extent, because unlike music, words are objectively true or false. If a song is strong in its theology, the people should eventually understand it, even if they do not now. With music this is not the case. Those natives will be no farther ahead if they learn to appreciate church-rock (and many would suggest, perhaps correctly, that they would actually be farther behind!).
The Music Test - This test asks if there is really “a song within the song”? Is the song singable? Does it flow from verse to verse? Does it stir the listener’s heart to join in the song? A song with beautiful words may quickly disappear from the hymn books simply because it is not singable.
So there are the seven tests suggested by the authors. Conspicuous by its absence is one I would like to add, which is:
The Excellence Test - Does the song provide God with the best music and lyrics? We should strive for excellence in all we give to God. If our giving to Him should not be half-hearted, how much less our worship?
I wanted to examine a few songs through this seven-part test (which I have expanded to eight parts) using some real-world examples. We’ll put each of three songs through this filter and see what comes out the other side. Do note that your answers and mine may vary a little bit.
“Amazing Grace” Meets “The Lion Sleeps Tonight”
When I was younger, I attended a church where the worship leader sang “Amazing Grace” to the tune of “The Lion Sleeps Tonight.” This was, of course, the version of the song make popular by The Tokens in 1961 and not the original which became popular as early as 1939 and which was subsequently recorded several times by a variety of artists.
- The Message Test - Pass. You can’t do much better than “Amazing Grace.”
- The Purpose Test - Pass. The music is joyful and fun, much like grace.
- The Association Test - Fail. People will associate this song with anything but worship.
- The Memory Test - Fail (though this test is somewhat subjective). But memories of “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” will likely not be God-honoring
- The Proper Emotions Test - Pass. The emotions stirred by the music will be good.
- The Understanding Test - Pass. Words are easy to understand and the tune is easy to understand.
- The Music Test - Pass. The song is plenty singable.
- The Excellence Test - Pass. “Amazing Grace” is an excellent song. “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” is silly, but is musically sound.
So there we have it. Singing “Amazing Grace” to “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” is a mix of passes and fails. I would suggest that it is inappropriate for use in worship.
Psalm 23 Travels to Geneva
I struggled a little bit to think of a song that seemed to have problems opposite to the last one. A church I used to attend sang The Apostles Creed to a tune that was quite reminiscent of the old “Davy Crockett” tune, but that didn’t quite do it. But I think I found one. Psalm 23 in the Genevan Psalter is a wonderful lyric set to an awful tune.
- The Message Test - Pass. The words are drawn almost directly from Scripture.
- The Purpose Test - Pass. The song was written to honor God.
- The Association Test - Pass. I don’t people will associate the music to much of anything.
- The Memory Test - Pass. See above.
- The Proper Emotions Test - Fail. Psalm 23 is a beautiful and joyous Psalm, yet this tune is in minor chords.
- The Understanding Test - Fail. People have likely never sung Genevan tunes, and especially the more difficult ones.
- The Music Test - Fail. It is difficult to sing this music (which has not been popular for at least half a millennium).
- The Excellence Test - Fail. The lyric passes, the music fails.
In this case we have quite a mixed result. The words are consistently strong, but the music is irrelevant and very difficult to sing. And it is such a shame that one of the greatest Psalms is presented in a format that is nearly impossible to enjoy. No wonder the people in these churches do not sing it very often. I still remember the first time I sang this Psalm set to a different tune (one of the two that goes with the lyric “The Lord’s my shepherd / I’ll not want / He makes me down to lie / In pastures green / He leadeth me / The quiet waters by”). I was suddenly amazed at the beauty of the twenty-third Psalm.
“Gonna Be” Rewritten
Allow me to present a third example. In this case we’ll look at a situation I heard of recently where “Gonna Be” by The Proclaimers (“I would walk 500 miles / And I would walk 500 more / Just to be the man who walks 1000 miles / And falls down at your door”) was rewritten and sung in the worship service. There were minor lyrical changes (ie “door” was changed to “throne”), the “Da da la da” during the chorus was changed to “You are my Lord,” etc. And of course the verses about drunkeness (“When I get drunk / Yeah I know I’m gonna be / I’m gonna be the man who gets drunk next to you”) and “havering” were removed.
- The Message Test - Fail. There were parts that expressed theology, but in the end it’s a love song converted to a God song.
- The Purpose Test - Fail. The song was written, at least partially, to laugh at and celebrate drunkeness (and has recently appeared in a beer commercial here in Canada).
- The Association Test - Fail. The song will certainly not be associated with God.
- The Memory Test - Fail. I doubt many people have God-honoring memories associated with this song.
- The Proper Emotions Test - Pass. It’s a fun, upbeat song that could be appropriate to joyful lyrics.
- The Understanding Test - Pass. It’s generally easy to understand.
- The Music Test - Pass. The lyrics and tune are quite easy to sing.
- The Excellence Test - Fail. The music is fun and good, but a quick re-write of lyrics does not generally produce excellence.
This example speaks to something that is increasingly popular in contemporary churches, which is re-writing popular songs to make them “church-worthy.” I would suggest, as in the above example, that this usually fails, either because of association or because the end result is just a bad song.
So now I’ve gone from “Song of the Year” to a test that I’ve found useful in evaluating songs. It turns out that “Song of the Year” wouldn’t be appropriate for use in a worship setting!

I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Comments (21)
Tim,I have often had some of the same thoughts you have expressed in this post. I have never seen the “music test” presented that way, but I like it. Usually, in my upbringing it was just black and white when it came to music. As I have grown older, I have attended various services where worship songs have been secularized and I have never left with a good feeling about it. I have heard Amazing Grace sung to the “Theme From Gilligan’s Island”, completely new Christian lyrics sung to Queen’s “We Will Rock You”, and my personal favorite (sarcastically) U2’s “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For” sung in a medley with “Turn Your Eyes Upon Jesus”. Obviously, none of those would pass the test either. As someone who has led worship, there are two specific areas of the test that I like, the message test and the music test. I know that these areas have been discussed at length elsewhere, but the importance of sound theological lyrics and a singable tune are very important. I guess that is why I appreciate people like Bob Kauflin, Keith Getty, Stuart Townend and others like them that are stressing Biblical theology in their lyrics and music that is so beautiful that the music could stand on its own. Thanks for the post
Interestingly, Ian Eskelin and Rob Bell used to hang out together at Wheaton. All three of us graduated in 1992. All I remember of Ian was that he was a fantastic synth programmer. I had little doubt he’d stay in music. Then again, I though Bell would, too, though I guess he’s now a rock star in a different way. ;-)
Geezers like me will also remember singing “Amazing Grace” to the tune of The Animals’ “The House of the Rising Sun.”
And last but not least, a very popular camp songbook recommended singing Luther’s “A Mighty Fortress” to the tune of “Light My Fire” by the Doors. I think it can be said without reservation that this combo fails nearly every level.
Crash course in “Classical” Music:
“…this classical or baroque music…” referring to Handel’s Messiah: definitely Baroque, as it was written by Handel, admittedly towards the end of the Baroque period (1741). But ‘classical’ in the sense that we use a synecdoche to signify the entire genre of high-brow instrumental music composed from the Baroque to the modern day.
Would have loved to hear Ligonier swell with Handel’s work.
How about “Amazing Grace” to the tune of Gilligan’s Island? We do that at camp a few times. These days, it probably passes the bad association test among kids, who never watched the TV show, although during the time, I might have failed it. I know as a kid, I didn’t know anything about the song this version was based on.
I read something about Louie Giglio, the guy in charge of the Passion conferences. They were talking about the music, and he mentioned to Chris Tomlin that eventually, when writing worship music, you will produce something that completely focuses on God, and takes man out of the song entirely. I think he’s right there - we can indeed sing about God without even mentioning us. They mentioned the song “How Great is Our God” as one that was being written when Giglio mentioned this, and it gets pretty close - two lines mention “me” - “my heart will sing ‘How Great Is Our God’”, and “Sing with me” - the rest of the song recounts God’s greatness.
Can you think of any hymns that do not mention us at all? “How Great Thou Art” and “Holy, Holy, Holy” are the closest I can see - Holy Holy Holy talks about “our song rising to thee”, but the song is about God’s holiness. How Great Thou Art recounts God’s greatness as experienced by us, but again, it isn’t ABOUT us. I wonder if there are any songs, either ancient or modern that don’t even MENTION “me”, or even mankind, but only talk about God. That would be quite a song.
I wish I could add this to my comment directly above - oh, well.
I’ve looked at a few more hymns, and they seem to either mention the perspective of the singer, or talk about man - but some talk about man in a way that says “who is man, that you are mindful of him”, echoing the Psalms. Not sure that we can completely take the “me” out of songs (or that we should - it is a reminder that this truth applies to us, after all), and some great worship songs are all about the response to what God has done, making them very focused on our response to God (“Amazing Grace”, for example - its all about how God has saved me, that I will be with him, that he has changed me, etc.). The bad ones are the ones that are all about me, and very little about God.
When I was in Nashville I got to write a few times with Ian. He is a super talented guy and fun to hang out with. He has a knack for cutting through things. He has written many of the songs that you hear on the radio by recording artists in CCM. He simply knows how to write a pop hit.
I don’t think I agree with this statement:
“I love rock music as much as the next guy, but have to admit that it somehow just can’t quite compare to the power of a choir, an orchestra, or even a really good pipe organ. Rock music tends to rely on volume rather than grandeur. Even a not-so-great performance of the Hallelujah chorus was beautiful, at least to my ears. It is just an amazing, powerful piece of music.”
This goes back to our discussion of “Can we rock the gospel” I would submit that you were stirred, NOT because of the form of the music, but because of the combination of the genius of Handel and the amazing text set to amazing music. Just throwing an orchestra and pipe organ up against a rock band does not mean that the former wins every time. It’s more about Handel and less about the musical form IMHO. Better said maybe would be “I would take Handel’s messiah over Jimi Hendrix any day” etc. What do you think?
I really dig your breaking down of those songs. As a worship pastor it’s great to think through these types of things and those 8 points are helpful toward that end.
Personally, I think that Johnnie Mac needs to check himself. An over-arching statement like that is clearly an over simplification based on his personally preferences. Granted there are not a ton of songs written in the last 15 years that will be around in another 50, but I think there are some. “In Christ Alone” comes to mind.
Zach - Quite right about MacArthur. I’m sure he would admit that there are plenty of good songs being written today and that his statement was something of a harsh generalization.
I love hymns (read - hymns, not revivalist songs a la finney and moody), and i love jon macarthur too, but macarthur kind of sounds like an uninformed geezer by saying that there’s nothing out there better than hymns.
He either doesn’t know what all is out there or he simply prefers hymns over newer music.
And yes, there are tons of crappy worship songs being written by the thousands with everything from an overly romanticized view of Christ to lyrics that don’t rhyme/flow to plain’ol bad theology…anyways.
Tim,
Just recently began reading your blog, first time commenter. I really appreciate this post. I’ve printed it and plan to use it as I meet with my leadership guys in our music ministry. Christian stations are discouraging to me everytime they through up a secular tune that doesn’t even attempt to change the lyrics but just assume the listener will make the jump to Christianize the song. Examples are “I Need You” (LeAnn Rimes) or “How Far is Heaven” (Los Lonely Boys). God is cheapened I think when this is done.
I appreciate the test and agree with many of your points. It helps put form to some things that have been floating around in my mind begging for organization.
Thanks for what you do,
Tyler in Omaha
P.S. I sit regularly under the teaching of the Irish Calvinist ;)
Please forgive the typo. “through” was meant to be “throw.” People in Nebraska do know how to spell despite my oversight.
“the task of separating the small amount of wheat from the mountains of chaff.”
That’s the work of elders, isn’t it. Need to protect the sheep from the tares, in all the ways they come into the wheat field.
Don’t need to pluck them up, just mark them for what they are.
I would say the CCM on radio that I listen to is 80% junk.
I see that others have pointed out, although not directly, that a song can only fail the association test and the memory test if the singer knows another set of words sung with the tune. If the popular tale is true about Luther writing hymns to bar tunes, A Might Fortress would fail these tests as well. For that reason I would rank these two tests as far less important than the others.
My personal favourite comment from Don Carson came from the Katoomba Easter Convention in 2005 (everyone loves Australia!):
“If your head is filled with empty-headed idiocies, then you’re an empty-headed idiot. It’s Biblical.”
This being said though, the difficult part about choosing songs (and, indeed, writing them) is getting music that applies to everyone in the church. As a worship leader in a church ranging from Christians who are twelve through to Christians who are 85, it’s hard to put a label on what does or does not make a good Christian song.
While I won’t touch most of the new stuff that’s coming out these days, in the same breath I won’t touch most of the old hymns either. There definitely has to be a mix. In a typical service at our church we sing one of the newest Hillsongs, something by Delirious, an old hymn or two and what have you in between. Each song can be judged on its individual merits - to put a blanket label of “This music isn’t as God glorifying as that” is ridiculous - especially when you’re trying to cater to such a wide audience. A new Christian won’t understand the intricacies and the beauty in some of the old hymns, but will be able to worship God with a simple “I love you” - whereas an older Christian will find this shallow.
As more mature Christians, we need to remember those younger than us and allow them to worship also.
All that being said though, I agree with Tim - it’s hard to doubt the power of God in Handel’s Messiah. I would propose that the eigth law is perhaps even most important, because no matter WHAT stage of the Christian walk you’re at, excellence is God-glorifying (as long as musical achievement is not your primary motivation!)
I see the hymn “In Christ Alone” mentioned above. Might I suggest that people take a look at the Keith Getty’s (the co-writer of “In Christ Alone”) full repertoire at Getty Music? Getty is consciously writing hymns for the purpose of congregational singing and with an eye to the perpetuity of the songs. Additionally, it is worth looking at Indelible Grace and Red Mountain Music who are working to set old hymn text into contemporary musical settings as well as writing a few new theologically rich hymns. I’m sure there are others, too, who are doing this kind of thinking and writing, but these three writers/groups(and the links you’ll find from their websites) have been a great resource for our congregation.
To NJC, I would say, if you are “trying to cater to such a wide audience,” then your heart is probably in the wrong place. We are playing for an audience of ONE. And the congregation are also singing for an audience of ONE. There should be no other catering going on, whatsoever. (Maybe you know this already and just weren’t thinking about it when you wrote that, so please pardon the rebuke, as I don’t know you, and you don’t know me.)
Scott W. brought up Keith Getty, and I also am one who has been deeply affected by the modern hymn “In Christ Alone” (is it just me, or does that song cover all Five Points?). I love the song, and I love to use it in corporate worship, where I can see that it has the same affect on others as well.
However, I was very disappointed when I started googling Keith Getty and his songs. A ticker on the Gettys’ website points out that “In Christ Alone” is #1 on CCLI’s charts. (Yes, that’s the equivalent of Billboard’s top 40, but it’s based on what songs are sung at churches all over the world every Sunday morning, and churches are required by copyright law to report this). If you search for “In Christ Alone” on Amazon.com, several of the top results are “Greatest Hits” type of albums, WOW Worship, WOW #1s: 31 of the Greatest Christian Music Hits Ever, Wow Hits 2005. And then further down the page you see that there’s this whole series of devotions based on worship songs. A single book devoted to one song, and how many of these top songs are covered in the series? A lot! So, if you feel like you need to have the whole collection, you’re spending a lot of money.
Now, I know that none of this is Keith’s fault. But I am very grateful that I was exposed to the song through Christ’s church, and not through the “marketplace” or radio.
I’m very sensitive to the issue of a Christian consumerist mindset, and I think it’s our responsibility as Christian leaders to guard against it in the church. When Jesus cleansed the temple (Mark 11, Matt. 21), it wasn’t just that he was having a bad temper on a bad day. Salvation is a free gift. You shouldn’t have to spend a lot of money on “the right CDs” in order to fit in with your church mates. You shouldn’t have to spend a lot of money to send your kids to Jr. high camp, and you shouldn’t be accused of lousy parenting for refusing to do so (I don’t have teenagers, but I was one once…). And I am bothered by the idea that the secular record labels are intentionally targeting a “Christian market” (see books like Mark Salomon’s Simplicity, Charlie Peacock’s At the Crossroads). They’re not a market, they’re God’s people.
Last night I was watching a clip on the Nightline podcast about Ron Luce’s “Battle Cry” thing. Now, I’m not going to address his ministry, except to point out one thing the journalist addressed. The interviewer was pointing out the hypocrisy in telling kids to renounce “brand names” and then at the same time, he was selling his own brand at all the tables around the stadium. And at a high price, as well. A Ron Luce stadium event is hardly the Temple of God. But among the throngs of kids who show up at such things there are young impressionable versions of God’s elect, and therefore, the Temple of the Holy Spirit, so the “den of robbers” thing applies.
Last fall, Derek Webb let me download his Mockingbird album for free, just for sending a nice email to 5 friends who I know would be blessed by it. And I am very grateful for ministries like Desiring God, who have a “whatever you can afford” policy, as well as free mp3 downloads, and complete texts of Piper’s books available online for free as well. And the fact that proceeds from Piper’s books don’t go to him, but go back into paying for all the free resources.
Okay, I better stop now, as this comment is turning into a blog in and of itself… God bless you!
You are exactly right, Aaron, that we are singing for an audience of One, the only One who is worthy of our praise. But if no catering goes on whatsoever, then as a worship leader I could quite easily justify the singing of songs only in Latin, and expect the congregation to sing along and worship God with me. I hardly think this would be beneficial to the majority of the congregation however!
My point regarding catering was not in attempt to allow congregations to “enjoy worship better” (then they would turn into an audience), instead, it is an attempt to allow as many people to bring glory to God as possible. Perhaps catering was the wrong word to use there. Discernment of what songs to use and how to play them perhaps?
“as many people to bring glory to God as possible” - that is, allowing them opportunities to worship God in a way that is closest to their heart. Most people barely even know how to sing, and to exclude them from our worship time by including songs that are too high or too low or just too impossible to sing is, quite simply, bad leadership. Disagree if you like, but as long as the pivotal priority is God in our worship (which was the point you were making), then we should work as hard as we can at excellence for His glory.
Tim, I’ve heard that you grew up in the Canadian Reformed Churches and so you would have sung Psalm 23 to the Genevan tune from time to time.
I wonder, though, if you aren’t shortchanging it when you say that it’s “a wonderful lyric set to an awful tune.”
I happen to like that particular tune. More than that, I think it works okay for Psalm 23. And I didn’t even grow up Canadian Reformed. I’m learning to sing the Genevan psalms now because they’re beautiful music (but see my comments below).
You said that this tune fails several of your tests because the music is difficult. Well, it may be that this music is harder to sing than some songs, though I don’t find this tune particularly difficult.
Frankly, I find a lot of contemporary tunes harder to sing because they seem to me to meander around instead of going anywhere.
I’m not persuaded, though, that this tune is unintelligible. It just takes work. And work isn’t a bad thing when it comes to worship.
You say, too, that the music is “irrelevant.” I don’t see how music can be either relevant or irrelevant. It can be difficult or easy. It can be popular or unpopular. But music itself can’t be relevant or irrelevant.
As for the “proper emotions test,” I wonder what emotions you think ought to be evoked by Psalm 23.
The example you give of a better tune is a particularly soothing tune. But is Psalm 23 really a soothing song? Parts of it may be. But it’s about feasting with enemies all around and about going through the valley of the shadow of death. I don’t catch a hint of that valley in the sweet tune you mention, but that valley comes through very strongly in the Genevan tune.
Psalm 23 isn’t a pastoral song, a song about being a sweet little lamb with a gentle shepherd nearby. It’s about being kept safe by a warrior-shepherd in the midst of death and enemy attacks. I think the Genevan tune captures that far better than the other example you give.
But having said all of that, when I say the Genevan tunes are beautiful music I mean if they’re sung well. I’ve been in Reformed churches where the people have the idea that the Genevan tunes are to be sung slowly, at a dirge-like pace.
If you do that to Psalm 23, it’ll drag, too. But if you sing it somewhat vigorously, it sounds a bit like Celtic music. Or (I say, tongue only somewhat in cheek) a bit like a drinking song, the kind of song you might sing gathered with a bunch of other soldiers at the table your Shepherd has spread for you in the presence of your enemies.
Yes, NJC, that’s exactly it! Praise God! Discernment is what we need, so that we can build bridges to serve them, minister to them, make the songs accessible, and facilitate worship for them so that as many of them may glorify God as possible! (I signed on here hoping to point out that you had a point, but maybe “catering” wasn’t the right word, and I see that you already mentioned that!)
Soli Deo Gloria
Cartmen used the same tactic to reach the height of Christian Pop Music success in the “Christian Rock Hard” episode on South Park, which rightly mocked this practice of recycling secular music. How ironic that South Park writers have more insight than many Christians on this topic.
Cartmen said all you needed to do was cross out the name in the love song and replace it with Jesus.
Why does the church feel the need to imitate popular culture? Is it to be relevant? Isn’t having the gospel message which can save man from eternal damnation already pretty relevant?
-Pete