Menu

Ideas

A Thousand Hymn Stories

,

For several years, this blog has provided not only Bible studies and devotionals, but also information on the history of our traditional hymns and gospel songs, explaining something of their meaning. In that time, I’ve covered something like a thousand hymns, and continue to add new material all the time.

The purpose of this labour of love is the help Christians have a new appreciation for, and a greater understanding of, our English hymnody. The Bible says we are to “sing praises with understanding” (Ps. 47:7; cf. I Cor. 14:15). This requires a growing knowledge both of God’s Word, and of our sacred songs.

We need fresh insights, if we are to direct our musical teaching and testimony to “one another,” and our musical praise and prayer “to the Lord” (Col. 3:16). If we’re simply content to sing words ritualistically that have no heartfelt meaning for us, we are using “vain repetitions as the heathen do” (Matt. 6:7), a practice that will neither please the Lord, nor benefit us!

I pray that you and your church will continue to make use of our great heritage of hymns. And to  help you with that, I encourage you to do several things:

  1. Come to this site regularly, and take a few minutes to read the most recent posts.
  2. If there is something that strikes you, or something you have a question about, add a comment to the page.
  3. Provide a link to this blog on your own blog or website, so that those who visit you will be able to come for a visit here, as well.
  4. Pass the word about the blog to your pastor, and your church’s worship leaders, so that they too can benefit from the content.
  5. Hopefully in the future, three books will be published for you to purchase here, so watch for that. The first, already published but currently out of print, is Discovering the Songs of Christmas. Other books in this series are in the works: Discovering the Songs of Comfort and Discovering the Songs of Calvary.

May the Lord bless you, and thanks so much for your partnership in the gospel.

Confessions of a Male Chauvinist (Or maybe not!)

,

Some editors of our newer hymn books seem insistent on–perhaps I might even say obsessed with–pursuing gender equality in our sacred songs. Everything has to come out evenly, so none feel neglected, or slighted. But is this revisionism justified, or even helpful?

Why change the venerable line “Faith of our fathers” to “faith of the martyrs”? Or, as The Seasonal Missalette has done, add a stanza about mothers, to balance things out? (“Our mothers, too, oppressed and wronged, / Still lived their faith with dignity.”) The original hymn is not speaking of fathers or husbands. The reference is to our believing forefathers. And were there foremothers, too? I suppose. But the former is a widely accepted term for ancestors.

This editorial tinkering seems to be spreading, at least in some circles. “Sons of men and angels say,” the second line of Christ the Lord Is Risen Today, has become “Earth and heav’n in chorus say”. And instead of caroling “Good Christian men rejoice,” we’re now asked to sing “Good Christians all rejoice,” or, “Good Christian friends rejoice.” The classic “Jesu, joy of man’s desiring” has become “Jesu, joy of our desiring.” But are there reasons why this may not be the best idea? I believe so.

1) It is widely understood that masculine nouns and pronouns can be used generically.

Perhaps the human authors of the Scriptures were guided in this by the Lord, to avoid the clumsiness and complications that could ensue by repeatedly including “sons and daughters,” brothers and sisters. In other words, one reason the masculine form may be used there is for simplicity. Can you imagine how it would be, otherwise?

Whoever has this world’s goods, and sees his [or her] brother [or sister] in need, and shuts up his [or her] heart from [him or her], how does the love of God abide in him [or her]? (I Jn. 3:17).

Masculine terms are used of Christians in general, in the Word of God. The Bible exhorts all believers to exhibit “brotherly love” (Rom. 12:10; I Thess. 4:9; Heb. 13:1). And we are to “love the brotherhood,” everyone in the family of God (I Pet. 2:17). The Bible also refers to all Christians as “sons of God” (Rom. 8:14; Gal. 4:6-7). And if we believe in the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, we need to think twice about assuming we know better what the words should be.

Join hands, then, brothers of the faith,
Whatever your race may be!
Who serves my Father as a son
Is surely kin to me.

It is condescending to think that women are unable to understand this. Are we to assume that they have so little perception that they aren’t aware that such statements include them? That may not be the intent, but it is the implication. Thus, in attempting to give women an equal representation, we may actually be insulting their intelligence!

2) There is merit in preserving our traditions.

Though tradition can be misused, it’s not a bad thing, in itself. The word simply refers to something that is passed on, from one person to another, or from one generation to another. The Apostle Paul spoke of the teachings he received from God, and conveyed to the Thessalonian believers, as traditions (II Thess. 2:15; 3:6).

Using our traditional hymnody gives us a sense of continuity and connectedness with the past. Abandoning or altering the older sacred songs (e.g. removing every “thee” and “thou”) can rob us of that sense of connection. Of course, we are certainly justified in changing the wording (or omitting a stanza or even dropping a hymn) if the original teaches something contrary to the Word of God. But beyond that, alterations seem rarely necessary.

Such editorial doctoring can compound itself. One change often mandates another. In the hymn Jesus, Thou Joy of Loving Hearts, the second line, “Thou Fount of Life, Thou Light of men,” has become “The fount of life, the light of all”–which doesn’t rhyme with “We turn unfilled to Thee again.” So, the latter must be changed to, “We turn, unfilled, to hear your call.” Come again? We turn to hear Your call? What on earth does that mean?

3) The proposed changes further divide the generations.

Some congregations have abandoned the hymn book altogether, in favour of contemporary songs projected on the wall. Another alternative has been to have what is called a “blended” service–which commonly means using mostly contemporary songs, with a few stanzas of an old hymn thrown in. But the latter may be set to an unfamiliar tune. And if the words are changed as well, those who love the songs may hardly recognize them.

Some of us don’t see as well as we used to. But we’re able to sing many of the great old hymns from memory, as we share favourites that have blessed our lives for many years. But I know of churches where most of the hymn singing has been abandoned, or the songs have been so abbreviated, and altered, that some have trouble joining in singing what’s left! This tends to disenfranchise our seniors, a valuable part of any congregation.

4) There is a danger of emasculating our hymnody.

I think that those obsessed with removing masculine references from our hymnody may be subtly emasculating the Christian faith in the minds of many, leaving it, by default, the province of women and children. Since God has given headship in the home, and leadership in the church specifically to men, is it not reasonable to have some hymns that address them, in particular?

What if the male references in our hymnody are taken to heart, particularly by men? Is that so harmful? We need men! Men of strong Christian character, to guide our families, and provide leadership in the church. We need a muscular Christianity that connects with them. Don’t omit from our hymnals the call to Rise Up, O Men of God, or other songs of that kind, simply because they’re addressed to men.

5) It’s dangerous to tamper with hymns that quote the Scriptures.

In the soul-stirring gospel song, Stand Up, Stand Up for Jesus, the third stanza says:

Ye that are men now serve Him against unnumbered foes;
Let courage rise with danger, and strength to strength oppose.

It’s a fine challenge to the men of the congregation. But that is changed in some hymnals to “Ye that are brave now serve Him.” Not only does the original line have a historical connection to the writing of the hymn (see my post here). It is also virtually a quotation from the book of Exodus: “Go now ye that are men, and serve the Lord” (Exod. 10:11, KJV). Even though the application to Christian men is at odds with the context (where the words are spoken to the Israelites by a disdainful heathen ruler), it is still the Word of God.

Instead of “Dear Lord and Father of mankind,” we’re now to warble “Dear God, embracing humankind.” The reference to God the Father has been removed, as being too sexist–even though God is spoken of as our Father in every New Testament book but one (the tiny epistle of Third John). Furthermore, masculine pronouns are uniformly used for God in the Bible–and for angels, incidentally. From Genesis to Revelation, God is addressed as “He” (Gen. 1:5; 2:8; Rev. 11:15; 21:3). He is our heavenly Father (Matt. 6:9).

Unless we are willing to reject the doctrine of verbal inspiration (II Tim. 3:16; II Pet. 1:21), there is simply no room for debate here. Yet the political correcters cannot leave even this alone. Another proposes changing 50% of the references to God in our hymns from “he,” to “she.” I was actually in a service where this was done. Song sheets had the congregation alternating “He’s got the whole world in His hands” with “She’s got the whole world in her hands”! (My oh my!)

6) Some changes obscure or miss doctrinal truths.

In a stanza of the hymn In Christ There Is No East or West (quoted earlier), “brothers of the faith” has been changed to “members of the faith,” and “who serves my Father as a son” to “who serves my Father as His child.”

Consider the latter phrase for a moment. The Bible refers to Christians both as children of God, and sons of God. But those who want to do away with what they see as the “exclusiveness” of the latter, often change references to “sons” in our hymns to “children.” On the surface, it may seem an acceptable alternative. However, the two aren’t precisely the same thing.

Through faith in Christ, we are children of God, brought into His forever family, through the new birth (Jn. 1:12-13). But all born-again children of God (male and female) are also elevated to the position of sonship, at the moment of conversion. In ancient times, sonship entailed a recognition of certain adult rights and privileges in the family. In the spiritual realm, these privileges of sonship are ours immediately, by adoption (Gal. 4:6-7; Eph. 1:5). Two different ministries of the Holy Spirit are involved, accomplishing two different things. So, let us be both children and sons of God.

Bottom line: There is rarely a valid reason to alter our hymns in this way, and it may actually do more harm than good.

Sacred Music in the Old Testament

Sacred music, music dedicated to God’s glory, has been around for a long time. Both vocal and instrumental music were used in the Jewish temple in ancient times. And the choosing and training of musicians, and other elements of music back then, suggest sound principles for ministry in the Church Age.

Overall, one gets the impression of careful preparation of the music in Israel, of a high standard of excellence, and a strong sense of responsibility before God–any or all of which are sometimes lacking today. Consider the following points from First Chronicles:

  1. The musicians were specifically chosen for their ministry by those in leadership (15:16). Who chooses the musicians who serve in your church? And are they selected for the right reasons, to engage in this important and spiritual ministry?
  2. They were freed from other duties, so they could concentrate on this ministry and make it as effective as possible (9:33). Overworked workers who take on too many jobs will quickly lower the standards, because they simply do not have the time to prepare properly.
  3. There was vocal music (15:16, 19), and instrumental music–from stringed instruments (15:16, 20, 21), wind instruments (15:24), and percussion instruments (15:16, 19). (Though it is interesting that drums are never once mentioned in the Bible. I wonder whether they were associated so much with carnal and pagan practices that God’s people avoided them.)
  4. The musicians were trained for their work by experienced and skillful leaders (15:22, 27). We are sometimes satisfied to ignore proper training, or leave it to chance. The results are too many times mediocre, and not truly honouring to God who deserves our best.
  5. The proper dress of the musicians was also considered (15:27). This can be a major problem in our day. Sloppy or immodest dress detracts from the message and draws attention away from the Lord. Faded or tattered jeans, tight or skimpy clothing, these have no place in the house of God, let alone on the platform. (Do you mean to say you would go dressed in your best to a job interview or a wedding, but not to stand in the Lord’s house and represent Him?)
  6. The focus of the music they presented was the Lord Himself (16:6, 8-9; cf. Ps. 22:3). They were offering something “to Him” (vs. 9). They were not putting on a performance to entertain the people. This is surely another major problem today. Consumerism has taken over the church. What will tickle the ear? What will attract a crowd? Hear the words of Archibald Brown from many years gone by:

“The devil has seldom done a cleverer thing than hinting to the church of Christ that part of her mission is to provide entertainment for people, with a view to winning them to the ranks….Here now is an opportunity for gratifying the flesh and yet retaining a comfortable conscience. We can now please ourselves in order to do good to others.”

Archibald Brown
  1. The instruments they used were made and dedicated (perhaps exclusively) to that purpose (16:42; 23:5). Too many times today the theory seems to be, “Let’s make our music sound just like the music in the unsaved world. Then people will feel more at home in the church.” My father once asked pointedly, “How come some churches won’t allow liberals in the pulpit, but they’ll allow them on the instruments?” The music of the church ought to be distinctly different, dedicated to its sacred purpose, not simply a clone of what is heard elsewhere.
  2. Their work was to be done consistently and thoroughly (16:37). This has to do with faithfulness, and with a serious commitment to duty. Careless tardiness, and absenteeism are not glorifying to God. When you are scheduled to be there…be there! Too many habitually toss God the leftovers, after they’ve used their time, talents and treasures to please themselves. To quote my musician father once more, “God doesn’t want your ‘spare time’!”
  3. They were carefully organized, and each knew his responsibility and the schedule for his ministry (25:1, 8; cf. 23:5). This is a function of leadership. It takes time and effort, and some administrative skill. And it is important.
  4. They were united in ministry, meaning likely there was a unity in their technical execution, and in their inner heart and purpose (II Chron. 5:13-14; cf. I Cor. 14:15, 33, 40). It is jarring when musicians do not play or sing together. (Usually it indicates more training and practice were needed.) Beyond that, the music of the church should provide an outward picture of the unity and harmony which should prevail in the church. But this takes effort (Eph. 4:3).

Hindrances to Making Good Music

Music a Creation of God

Though there is no specific statement in the Scriptures to that effect, it is strongly implied. John speaks of Christ, and says, “All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made” (Jn. 1:3). Paul says the same thing even more emphatically. “By Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible…” (Col. 1:16), and Romans 11:36 says, “Of Him and through Him and to Him are all things.”

If language means anything and “all” means all, then the Lord God who created “all things” is the Originator of music. It is not surprising, then, that His earthly creation is filled with it. Scripture speaks of “the voice of the turtledove” (Song 2:12) and tells us that “both the pelican and the bittern…shall sing in the windows” (Zeph. 2:14). Birds and crickets and whales have their songs. The wind and the waves make their own unique music. All nature sings.

The Lord Himself Sings

Several passages refer to it. One of the tenderest pictures of God’s relationship with Israel is given in Zephaniah 3:17. The prophet is speaking of the future millennial kingdom, and the Messiah’s comforting of His people Israel (cf. vs. 15). As a mother holds her baby close and sings gentle songs of mother-love, so the Lord will draw Israel to Himself and sing of His love for her.

The Lord your God in your midst, the Mighty One, will save; He will rejoice over you with gladness, He will quiet you with His love, He will rejoice over you with singing.

Mark, in his Gospel, refers to Jesus and His disciples singing at the Last Supper (Mk. 14:26). Then, in Hebrews 2:12, the Son of God proclaims to His heavenly Father, “I will declare Your name to My brethren; in the midst of the congregation I will sing praise to You.”

As an aside, I have often wondered also whether music is the language of heaven. We know there will be singing there (Rev. 5:9-10). But perhaps, even before the redeemed began to take up residence, God and the angels regularly sang to one another. There is a wonderful line in Lord of the Rings that may reflect the spirit of this. Frodo and his hobbit companions are visiting the home of the magical Tom Bombadil, and Tolkien says, “The guests became suddenly aware that they were singing merrily, as if it was easier and more natural than talking.” That may well be how it is for us, too, in God’s presence.

Mankind’s Gift for Music

Human beings have wonderful gifts to create and share music. That is understandable, since we were made in the image of God (Gen. 1:27) and God is creative and makes use of music. Adam’s descendant, Jubal, is credited with developing early forms of music (Gen. 4:21). And to this day there are those who are skilled in composing it and performing it.

It is vital to note, however, that although God created music as a form of expression, it is human beings who compose and perform specific songs. At these points, God’s gift passes through the filter of human personality. The notion that because God created music, therefore no music can possibly be corrupt, is nonsense. God created angels too, but we do not approve of Satan’s actions on that account.

Compare the gift of language. Similar to music, it is a God-given means of expression and communication. Adam had this ability on the first day of his creation (Gen. 2:19-20). However, wicked people abuse this gift and produce “corrupt” words (Eph. 4:29) and “filthy language” (Col. 3:8)–even messages that are satanic (Matt. 16:22-23). In a similar way, once the gift of God is subjected to the will of an individual, there is another dimension to be considered. Men and women write the songs we sing. And it is not simply that a good thing is being used for a bad purpose. The thing itself can be polluted.

Therefore, if we are to evaluate music on the basis of its origins, we must not only consider the general origin–that God gave us the gift of music. We also need to consider the human element, the origin of each piece of music. Though we have no way of making a comparison, it seems logical to suppose that, were it not for the fall, man would have been able to produce even more glorious and consistently God-honouring songs. But sin has changed all that. Now, we face an ongoing struggle against the world, the flesh and the devil. That is what hinders us from making good music to the glory of God.

1) The Pressure of the World

This evil world, Satan’s kingdom, with its triple anti-God dogmas of egocentrism, materialism, and sensuality, has aggressively incorporated music as another means to achieve its temporal goals, and communicate its sinful philosophy. And the influence of the world exerts pressure on the one who desires to serve Christ (Rom. 12:2). If we are not on guard, it will affect the music we create and use.

2) The Perversity of the Flesh

Apart from the regenerating work of the Spirit of God, men are spiritually dead (Eph. 2:1, 5). Even after the new birth has taken place, our powers are sadly diminished in comparison to what they might have been–and will one day be again. The flesh (the sin nature) is in continual rebellion against the spirit, within the child of God. (Gal. 5:17). This too will tend to affect our music.

3) The Persuasion of the Devil

Further, we have Satan to contend with. He is intent on using everything God has made for a dishonest and destructive purpose (Jn. 8:44; Eph. 6:12). That objective has historically included his appropriation and employment of God’s gift of music (cf. Exod. 32:4-6, 17-19; Job 30:9; Lam. 3:63; Dan. 3:5; Amos 6:3-7).

Bottom line: We must be constantly attentive to the spiritual quality of our music, and depend upon the grace of God to render what is pleasing to Him. As a hymn by George Heath puts it:

My soul, be on thy guard;
Ten thousand foes arise;
The hosts of sin are pressing hard
To draw thee from the skies.

O watch, and fight, and pray;
The battle ne’er give o’er;
Renew it boldly every day,
And help divine implore.

Ne’er think the victory won,
Nor lay thine armour down;
The work of faith will not be done,
Till thou obtain the crown.

Doesn’t Ministry Begin at Home?

,

There are at least three versions of the story behind No One Ever Cared for Me Like Jesus–differing in some details from one another. The interesting thing is that two of them come directly from the author, Charles Weigle himself. One is an hour long reminiscence that includes the story behind the hymn. The other (here) is a short account, more specifically about the song. Both clearly were given when Mr. Weigle was elderly, and it is understandable that some of the details had become hazy. However, the more I listened to these recordings, the more uncomfortable I felt.

Charles Weigle

The story as I originally tracked it down, was that Weigle’s wife was a wayward and worldly woman who, in the end, couldn’t continue to stomach his Christian stand, and so she left him. But from the man himself we get a hint something a little different.

Charles Frederick Weigle was a travelling evangelist, constantly on the go, often away from home. Reading between the lines of his own description, his wife comes across as a lonely, and possibly weak woman. It seems they had at least one child (a daughter). And there Mrs. Weigle was left alone, to raise her daughter almost as a single mother, and to face her personal temptations and spiritual struggles on her own.

Mrs. Weigle, again by her husband’s own account, pled with him again and again to please stay home and help her. But he adamantly refused, saying he was called of God to be an evangelist, and called to do the work of the Lord. He virtually says that his wife’s pleadings were the devil’s attempt to hinder his work for God.

Exactly at this point, I have a problem. And I must tread carefully here. I do not presume to sit in judgment over this man, who left us more than four decades ago. His evangelistic ministry seems to have borne fruit, and his many songs are heartwarming. Further, I don’t think there is one inflexible rule in this matter. The Lord does lead different people different ways. But without condemning Charles Weigle in particular, I do think there are issues that need a closer look.

Though it’s possible to see a travelling evangelistic ministry as a noble service, requiring great sacrifice, there is another point of view. There is something inflating to the ego about moving masses of people by emotional appeals, and hearing words of praise for “your wonderful ministry,” over and over. And it is much easier to put on a pious Christian face with strangers, those who do not get a chance to see us in our worst moments. It is often harder to stay at home and deal with the colds and flu, and shopping, and broken water lines, and bills, and the inevitable conflicts. But that and more is all a part of family life.

I do not know what vows were repeated at the Weigles’ wedding. But given the time in which they lived, they likely followed the traditional form. That would mean the groom was called upon to respond in the affirmative to a question something like this, regarding his bride:

“Wilt thou love and comfort her, honour and keep her, and in joy and sorrow, preserve with her this bond, holy and unbroken, until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, or God by death shall separate you?”

Now, some questions:

  • Even if the Lord were to call a husband to some kind of public ministry–pastor, evangelist, missionary, or something else–does not the care of his wife and family remain a significant part of his Christian service?
  • Is the latter service for the Lord to be relegated to second place, and the former always to take the bulk of the man’s time, and energy, and financial resources?
  • Can he fulfil God’s command to love his wife just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her (Eph. 5:25), by rarely being home to give practical support to those committed to his charge?
  • What if such a husband were called to a time-consuming ministry that pressured him to be more and more an absentee from the home? But what if he determined to curtail those absences significantly,  and put more focus on his family? Would the Lord not honour that?
  • And if he was open to it, could the Lord not have revealed some new kind of ministry that husband and wife could be involved in together? Or one that enabled him to be the involved husband and father he should be?

Again I say, the Lord leads different people in different ways. I’m not presuming to judge in any individual situation. But I do think this issue deserves a very careful and prayerful examination. I’ve met MKs and PKs (missionaries’ kids, and pastor’s kids) who grew up bitter and resentful toward the church and the things of God, because they were always relegated to second place after “the Lord’s work.” I’m not for a moment excusing a bitter spirit in such a case, but I do wonder if the fault is all on one side. The Lord’s work, like charity, surely begins at home.

Today in 1845 – Thomas Koschat Born

, ,

Thomas Koschat studied chemistry in Vienna in order to become a textile chemist. He also sang in the court opera choir, eventually becoming its director. In later years he formed the Koschat Quartet that toured Europe and America extensively.

The composer’s tune Poland (also known as Koschat) is used with The Lord Is My Shepherd, one of many renderings of Psalm 23. The text for this one was written by James Montgomery and published in 1822. The alto part of the tune is particularly important because it carries the melody at the beginning. If you sing the hymn, perhaps you could encourage women with lower voices to sing those notes. Or you might try having all the ladies on the soprano part and all the men singing the alto.

Graphic Flock of Sheep

The Word of God compares believers to sheep many times, and the imagery is not necessarily complimentary. Sheep are seen as weak and vulnerable, subject to attacks both from parasites and from predatory animals such as wolves. They also have a tendency to wander and endanger themselves, and they need the constant oversight of a capable shepherd. Praise the Lord we have an infinitely capable Shepherd in the Lord Jesus, who is pictured in the Bible as:

  • The good Shepherd who gave His life to save us (Jn. 10:11)
  • The great Shepherd who is able to keep us safe (Heb. 13:20-21)
  • The chief Shepherd who will come again to reward His servants (I Pet. 5:2-4)

The Lord is my Shepherd, no want shall I know;
I feed in green pastures, safe folded I rest;
He leadeth my soul where the still waters flow,
Restores me when wand’ring, redeems when oppressed.

Let goodness and mercy, my bountiful God,
Still follow my steps till I meet Thee above;
I seek, by the path which my forefathers trod,
Through land of their sojourn, Thy kingdom of love.

(2) Today in 1922 – William Jude Died

William Herbert Jude was a church organist and composer in Britain. He travelled extensively (including to Australia), giving lectures on musical themes, and recitals on the organ. He also wrote and edited publications, particularly dealing with church music (the Monthly Hymnal, Ministry of Music, Music and the Higher Life, Mission Hymns, and Festival Hymns).

William Jude wrote an operetta (Innocents Abroad), and a number of anthems and songs. He has given us the tune for Cecil Frances Alexander’s hymn of dedication, Jesus Calls Us. The tune’s name is Galilee (though it is sometimes called Jude, after the composer.) The hymn is based on the record in Matthew of Jesus calling some of His disciples:

Jesus, walking by the Sea of Galilee, saw two brothers, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen. Then HE said to them, “Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.” They immediately left their nets and followed Him (Matt. 4:18-20).

Mrs. Alexander wrote the song for the commemoration of Saint Andrew’s Day (Nov. 30) in her church. That is why a stanza, now usually omitted, makes specific reference to him.

As of old Saint Andrew heard it
By the Galilean lake,
Turned from home and toil and kindred,
Leaving all for Jesus’ sake.

Without that stanza, the hymn becomes an effective call for believers to establish eternal priorities and commit ourselves to Christian service.

Jesus calls us over the tumult
Of our life’s wild, restless, sea;
Day by day His sweet voice soundeth,
Saying, “Christian, follow Me!”

Jesus calls us from the worship
Of the vain world’s golden store,
From each idol that would keep us,
Saying, “Christian, love Me more!”

In our joys and in our sorrows,
Days of toil and hours of ease,
Still He calls, in cares and pleasures,
“Christian, love Me more than these!”

Jesus calls us! By Thy mercies,
Saviour may we hear Thy call,
Give our hearts to Thine obedience,
Serve and love Thee best of all.

Here’s a video link to some guitar variations on William Jude’s tune.

The “Total Message” of a Song

The message of a song is contained and expressed in more than the words. More, even, than the music. If we are determined to communicate God’s truth effectively with our hymns and gospel songs, we must give some thought to the total message of the song.

To begin with, we need to make an important distinction. That there is a vast difference between music in general, and a particular song. We can say that God created music–that He gave us the gift of music. But does that mean that God alone is responsible for every single song that’s been written? No, it doesn’t. But that’s an argument we sometimes hear. That all music is good, because it’s a gift of God.

Well, that’s a neat trick. But it won’t work–because when a song is written, God’s gift of music passes through the filter of a human personality. And it’s subjected to a multitude of decisions, based on the musician’s own purpose. So, yes, music is a gift of God. But it’s individual people who write the songs. And at that point, God’s gift can be abused.

It’s just like the gift of speech. Because God gave us the gift of speech, does that mean all we say is good and edifying? No, the Bible’s very clear about that. God’s gift can be misused, and abused. So, Ephesians 4:29 says, “Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth.” And Colossians tells us, “Put off…filthy language out of your mouth” (Col. 3:8). The words we choose and use, can either honour the Lord, or dishonour Him. And so can the music we write, and use.

And to see how music conveys its message–whether good or bad, we need to look at the total message of the song. Because a number of things are working together in any musical presentation.

It’s similar to what the Bible says about the operation of the local church. God’s Word talks about “the effectual working in the measure of every part [in other words, the effective work done when every part of the body of Christ does its job]” (Eph. 4:16). That has to do with the cooperation of God’s people, in the work of the church. But the same principle applies to the message of our songs.

I suggest to you that there are at least five elements that work together, contributing to the whole presentation, when, let us say, a soloist ministers in music in our Sunday morning service. Here is a little equation relating to our church music:

THE TOTAL MESSAGE = the Words + the Music + the Presentation + the Musician’s Known Lifestyle + the Social Context of the Music

1. The Words of the Song

If we’re using a song in Christian ministry, the words should be our first consideration. We should begin be asking, are they biblical? Are they in harmony with the Word of God? Then, the next thing is, are they clear? Is there a good, solid, biblical message? And is it expressed in a clear and unmistakable way?

Paul says, “If the trumpet makes an uncertain sound, who will prepare for battle?” (I Cor. 14:8). In other words, if the bugler plays, and you can’t tell if it’s the signal to go to bed, or charge the enemy, then you’ve got a problem! And it’s the same with any inaccurate or vague lyrics to our Christian songs.

Here’s a song recorded a few years ago by a group that professes to be Christian. It’s meant to be a Christian song. But what do you think?

There inside my dream I heard the river roar;
I stumbled through the darkened mist
But I couldn’t find the shore.
Then a voice within the mist said,
“Tell me what you seek?”
I said, “I have a mighty thirst,
But I feel so tired and weak.”
[And] He said, “I am the river,
full of power and truth.
You’ve been looking outside yourself,
When it’s there inside of you.
And the river is love, the river is peace,
And the river will flow,
Through the hearts of those who believe.

Now maybe that’s supposed to be telling us about the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit in the Christian’s life. But it sounds more like New Age teaching to me. And it illustrates another of my pet peeves about some contemporary religious songs. Never once does it identify the Lord by name. It’s a “voice,” and it’s “he.” But who’s what? It could be Buddha, or Mohammed. Or the fellow’s girlfriend, or somebody else.

It says in Malachi, “‘Where is My honour?’…says the Lord of hosts, ‘to you priests who despise My name?'” (Mal. 1:6). And I get the feeling that some songwriters, today, despise the name of the Lord. Or perhaps they choose to omit it and ignore it for commercial purposes. More people will buy their music if it’s not too specific!

The words of our sacred songs need to be biblical, and clear. And let me give you an example of some simple words, that present a profound message.

I am so glad that our Father in heaven
Tells of His love, in the Book He has given.
Wonderful things in the Bible I see,
And this is the dearest, that Jesus loves ME.

Though I forget Him, and wander away,
Still He doth love me, wherever I stray.
Back to His dear loving arms would I flee,
When I remember that Jesus loves me.

Oh, if there’s only one song I can sing,
When in His beauty I see the great King,
This shall my song in eternity be,
Oh, what a wonder, that Jesus loves me!

There’s no question there about what that song’s saying. There’s no vague, uncertain “he” or “him.” The words are perfectly clear. But that’s one of those old-fashioned hymns that some folks want us to discard.

2. The Music of the Song

The second element in the total message of a song is the music. And here’s a principle. When music is used to help communicate God’s truth, it functions like the frame of a picture. If you have a lovely work of art, you don’t want the frame to distract from the picture, or clash with the picture. It should enhance it. And draw our attention to the picture, helping us to appreciate it.

It’s the same with the wedding of words and music, when it comes to Christian songs. If the words and the music aren’t compatible, the result will be confusion. Both should be heading the same way. The music should help us understand the words. The comments of Bernard of Clairvaux (circa 1090 to 1153) on sacred music are of interest because they show this thinking nearly a thousand years ago:

“Let [the music] be sweet, but without levity, and while it pleases the ear, let it move the heart….It should not contradict the sense of the words, but rather enhance it.”

Now, let me meddle for a moment. That principle shows us precisely why it’s so difficult to take music with a pounding rock beat–music that, according to many secular musicians, preaches rebellion, and sexuality, and put a Christian lyric with it, and expect to have clear communication. It doesn’t work that way. Because the music and the words are saying something quite different.

In Deuteronomy, God warns the Israelites not to say, “How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.” No, God says, “You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way; for every abomination to the Lord which He hates they have done to their gods” (Deut. 12:30-31). And as the Lord Jesus says later, “What is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God” (Lk. 16:15).

So, when we try to put those two together–worldly music and Christian lyrics, the frame doesn’t suit the picture very well. But even using the wrong hymn tune can do the same thing–even if it’s a perfectly good hymn tune. Let me give you an example.

Try singing the hymn Alas, and Did My Saviour Bleed? to the tune used for the gospel song Faith Is the Victory (omitting the refrain of the latter). Then, try singing Faith is the Victory to the tune used for Alas, and Did My Saviour Bleed? (a tune called Martyrdom).

The galloping rhythms of Ira Sankey’s tune suit the advancing army pictured in the text of Faith Is the Victory, but the tune Martyrdom would put the cavalry to sleep! Nor is Sankey’s rousing tune fitted to a prayerful meditation on the cross. The tune should provide an appropriate frame for the words.

3. The Presentation of the Song

In our services, much of the music is sung by the congregation. But at this point I want to consider particularly the music that’s presented from the platform. How it’s presented will have a definite influence on the message that comes across.

Some singers seem intent on drawing attention to themselves, and how good-looking they are. In my own experience, having preached in many different churches, dress can be a problem, especially with respect to the current styles for women. Some can be decidedly immodest! Or perhaps the singer wants to call our attention to what a great voice he or she has, rather than focusing on the clear communication of God’s truth.

If we’re not careful, the congregation can get so enthralled with (or repelled by!)  the presentation that they lose sight of the message. We musicians need to meditate on the words of John the Baptist: “He [Christ] must increase, but I must decrease” (Jn. 3:30).

That is one reason I am against applauding after a ministry in music. Say what you like, the main message sent when we clap is, “Good job! Well done! You sure are talented!” But if folks are giving that much attention to the performance, then the one up front has failed. He has stopped being a minister of the Lord and has become an entertainer.

4. The Musician’s Known Lifestyle

Think again of a ministry in music from the platform. What do you know about the presenter? And I refer to his or her known lifestyle for this reason. It’s what we know about the person that’ll affect the integrity of the presentation. I’m not saying secret sins aren’t important to God. Of course they are. But I don’t know about them. So they don’t affect me the same way, when I listen.

For instance, I can listen to a recording of John Doe singing a hymn. And if he does it well, I can appreciate the message of the song. But I cringe when I hear some Hollywood type singing about the Lord. Some fellow that I know has a filthy mouth, or a bad moral reputation.

I’ve been in the mall, at Christmas time, and heard music over the PA. Maybe a Christmas hymn I love, and I’ve felt sick in the pit of my stomach. “Christ by highest heaven adored, / Christ the everlasting Lord…” And I know, in his life, the singer’s openly profaning that very name, by how he behaves.

The Word of God says that “for every word men speak they will give account in the day of judgment.” (Matt. 12:36). But my point here is that it’s what I know about the lifestyle of the musician that particularly affects the message of the song to me. I wonder how many needy people were turned off from the gospel, and from all preachers, and from all churches, when the wicked lifestyles of a couple of TV preachers were revealed, back in the 1980s? It matters!

No, nobody’s perfect. But we need to take care of our walk with the Lord if we are going to minister to others. (Compare the many references to behaviour when the Bible describes those qualified to take leadership in the church, I Tim. 3:1-16; Tit. 1:5-9.) How we live will say as much as (or more than) the words that come out of our mouths. I could say more about this, but I want to move now to the fifth element.

5. The Social Context of the Music

And what I mean by that is this: We need to consider carefully just how the music, or music like it, is being used in other places. What is it associated with in people’s minds?

This is really a version of the “meat offered to idols” problem that Paul deals with in Corinthians (I Cor. 8:1-13). Meat previously offered to idols was often taken down to the market, and sold. (After all, why not? The idol wasn’t going to eat it!) And it was often excellent meat. So some Christians said, “Well, an idol isn’t a real god. So why can’t we buy the meat?” But other folks–maybe those who used to worship those very idols–felt terrible about it. They wanted no part of it.

And something similar can happen with music. If we insist that all music is neutral, and we’re going to use any music we like in church, we may be in danger of offending some, and causing them to stumble. I was in a church one time, and a fellow came to me afterward, quite upset. He said, “What are they doing playing that kind of music in here? That’s what I used to listen to in the bars. I came here to get away from it!”

As Martin Luther put it, our sacred music should “wean [people] away from…carnal songs, and teach them something of value in their place.” And I love what English essayist Robert Bridges had to say. He wrote:

If we consider and ask ourselves what sort of music we should wish to hear on entering a church, we should surely, in describing our ideal, say first of all that it must be something different from what is heard elsewhere. It should be a sacred music, devoted to its purpose, a music whose peace should still passion, whose dignity should strengthen our faith, whose unquestioned beauty should find a home in our hearts.

That’s pretty good. But it’s quite contrary to the prevailing attitude. The current thought is that we should give people the kind of music they listen to on the radio all week (with some appropriately christianized words), so that they’ll enjoy coming to church.

Listen to the perceptive words of Archibald Brown, a contemporary of Charles Spurgeon’s. (This sounds very up to date, even though it was written a century or so ago!)

It is only in the past few years that amusement has become the recognized instrument of our warfare and developed into a mission….The devil has seldom done a cleverer thing than hinting to the church of Christ that part of her mission is to provide entertainment for people, with a view to winning them into the ranks. The human nature that lies in every heart has risen to the bait. Here now is an opportunity of gratifying the flesh and yet retaining a comfortable conscience. We can now please ourselves in order to do good to others.

Ouch! But that is what is being done. And as a result, instead of the church advancing into the world with a fiery gospel, the world has more and more encroached upon the church. We need a sacred music that is different from what is heard elsewhere, a music dedicated to the glory of God, not associated in people’s minds with the godless world.

I invite you to consider carefully the Total Message of our songs, as we seek to minister to the people of God in the house of God. Each of the elements is a factor contributing to the message we receive, and its clarity and effectiveness.

Ideas for your Church: Water Bottles

This is a simple idea, but it is worth trying…

water bottle

One time we had a family visit our church. They all seemed to enjoy the service, but afterward the daughter said, “This church sings so much they should provide water bottles in the pews!” We all laughed at that, but the comment stuck with me.

Recently (in another church) we had a Sunday afternoon Hymn Sing. The weather was hot, but we were prepared for that. I told the story of young Natalie’s observation and said, “Guess what. That’s exactly what we are going to do!” With that, a couple of our men came down the aisle with small chilled bottles of water which were distributed to anyone who wanted one. It brought a laugh, but it also served a good purpose.

Perhaps you worship in air conditioned comfort. We do not. A refreshing drink of water was just the thing to add more zest to the singing on that warm afternoon.

Lord’s Day Meditation – All Lookin’

For the work of Christ he came close to death, not regarding his life, to supply what was lacking in your service toward me.

Phil. 2:30

Many years ago, I went with my parents on a tour of some historical sites in the eastern United States. One day we visited a restored home–it might have been in Williamsburg–and entered the kitchen. An elderly black woman, in period costume, sat by the stove, a table of utensils in front of her. My father smiled and said, “So, are you preparing something for us to eat?”

“No suh.” she replied, “This am all lookin’ and no cookin.’”

It was a cute comment–one she had likely used many times. But it reminds me of something more serious: The all too frequent shallowness of our Christianity. Too many of us have a veneer of religion, but it is missing the power and the practicality of living for Christ and consistently demonstrating His love to those around.

Epaphroditus was not like that (Eph. 2:25-30). Paul was in prison, in Rome. And Epaphroditus had come from the church at Philippi to do whatever he could to help and encourage him. We are told little about the background or identity of this man. But there is a theory that he was none other than the Philippian jailer whom Paul led to Christ when he was in prison there (cf. Acts 16:22-34).

While there is no proof of this in the biblical record, it is logical. No doubt the man had a deep affection for the apostle, and a sense of indebtedness to him for how the Lord had used Paul to bring him and his family to salvation. And we can picture a church assembly at which the believers discussed how they might help Paul–and could someone go Rome to be of assistance to him? The former jailer (perhaps now discharged from military service) would have spoken up and offered himself readily, pointing out that he knew his way around the city of Rome.

All this is speculative, of course, but certainly possible. What we do know, is that Epaphroditus had a keen sense that he was representing the whole congregation back in Philippi. Separated from Paul as they were by many miles, there was so much they wanted to do, but couldn’t. And Epaphroditus tried to do everything he thought the others would do if they were there. And he nearly died in the attempt!

This is faith in shoe leather. It shows a dedication to the cause of Christ that is all too rare. More than a superficial religiosity, this is lookin’ with the cookin’ too! And though God may not call upon us to labour for Him to the point where we become ill because of it, His grace and love ought to motivate us to a fullness of dedication in which we make ourselves and all our resources fully available to Him. May He help us to put our priorities in order and do just that. In the words of a Peter Scholtes song we used to sing back in the 60’s,

They’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love,
Yes, they’ll know we are Christians by our love.

Lord’s Day Meditation – The Ideal Church

We give thanks to God always for you all, making mention of you in our prayers, remembering without ceasing your work of faith, labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ in the sight of our God and Father.

I Thess. 1:2-3

I’m sure there are many characteristics that could be listed if we were describing the ideal church. Among other things it should be Christ-centred, and have:

  • A saved membership
  • A spiritual leadership
  • A soundness of doctrine
  • A servant lifestyle

And by various means, it should provide for:

  • Exaltation of God (worship)
  • Edification of believers
  • Evangelism  of the lost

But our text gives us three qualities that are essential in all of this. And what an ideal to aspire to! Not that the Thessalonian church was perfect, but they exhibited some exemplary qualities that each local church should have. And there might be a link between vs. 2-3 and vs. 9-10.

  • faith
  • love
  • hope

Gene Getz in his writings emphasizes these three qualities–faith, hope, and love–as essential to the life of the local church (see his book, The Measure of a Church). The three are mentioned in close proximity several times in the New Testament (cf. I Cor. 13:13). They constitute things that will be evident in a healthy church. And it is striking that Jesus, as far as the sacred record goes, spoke only to three people by name, after His resurrection.

  • To Mary He gave new hope (Jn. 20:16-17).
  • In Thomas He instilled faith (Jn. 20:26-29).
  • In Peter He prompted love (Jn. 21:15-17).

These are characteristics each of us should exhibit and develop in our Christian lives and, as that happens, they will also be seen in the fellowship of believers, to the glory of God.

Load More