I Don't Find Jokes About Worship Music Very Funny
This post is a second
attempt on this topic. The first was
pushback on the cartoon above that a friend had posted on Facebook. It was
lacking in grace. I regret that but
remain committed to my point.
I
have a good sense of humor. I enjoy the
satirical website, Lark News, and even
my own copy of A Field Guide toEvangelicals and Their Habitat. I
can laugh at myself and my evangelical tradition. But I don’t find jokes about worship music
very funny.
Most
of the time, it is contemporary praise and worship songs that are the target of
the jokes and cartoons I’ve seen and heard.
There was a variation of Cows in theCorn several years ago that poked fun at hymns. Nevertheless, the repetition found in praise
and worship is the usual target. It is
my experience that people who don’t like the genre think the jokes are really
funny.
I
don’t. I never have. Here’s why:
Praise
and worship songs are different than hymns. That seems obvious, but the
difference lies much deeper than music and text. Generally speaking, hymns – especially the
classic, timeless hymns (e.g. Holy, Holy,
Holy; Immortal, Invisible; For All the Saints, etc…) – contain beautiful
theology densely expressed in poetry.
Frankly, it’s good that we have hymnals.
The words go by too fast on the screen.
It would be good to pause and just read them. The poetry in our best hymns withstands the deepest
contemplation. They are rich in content
and meaning. Such hymns typically challenge
and speak to our intellect. While the
text and singing of hymns may spark intense emotion at times, the experience is
generally cognitive because the texts are so rich.
Gospel
hymns, which hold a significant part of the repertoire for many evangelicals
(especially older ones) are typically less dense in their theology. These are the hymns with refrains and, as a
rule, grew out of the revivalist tradition.
They are generally testimonial in nature, that is, they relate the
experience of a Christian. In the
revivalist tradition, hymns and songs were sung in preparation to hear the
sermon or in response to it (the invitation hymn). They may be deeply emotional in their joy or
devotion but their function was utilitarian.
They served as preparation or response to the Word.
The
praise and worship genre, however, is meant to be a different sort of
experience. It is essential to
understand that P/W comes from the Charismatic Movement. While the strength of hymns is their
cognitive richness and the gospel hymns are good expressions of testimony, P/W
is best understood as an affective experience. Affect, of course, means the emotional part
of us. While modern people are
suspicious of emotion, affect is an essential way of knowing, just like
cognitive knowing. Imagine a marriage
without emotion. It wouldn’t last
long. Emotion is vitally important in the
relationship that we have with God expressed in worship. It helps us to engage spiritually beyond the
black and white of doctrinal truth. A.W.
Tozer once defined worship as “to feel in your heart.”
Most
P/W songs seek to primarily engage the affect of celebration or
contemplation. That is why you will
find frequent repetition in these songs.
They are not meant to engage our intellect as much as our emotion. This is an essential difference between
P/W songs and hymns.
We
have problems and misunderstandings when we unconsciously equate P/W songs with
hymns or gospel hymns. If your worship
language has primarily been hymns or gospel hymns, the repetition of P/W songs
will be confusing and off-putting to you.
The lack of textual depth in comparison to hymns may easily cultivate
disrespect in your mind for the genre. That’s why the jokes seem funny. You cannot sing a P/W song the same way that
you sing a hymn. You cannot compare P/W
to hymns on the same criteria. Depending
on which genre you prefer, the other one will always lose. (There are, of course, a large number of
people who don’t like or disrespect hymns for the same reason: they don’t appreciate
their value.)
For
the value of a P/W song to be fully understood it has to be experienced. The worshipper has to risk releasing
themselves emotionally into the song. The
experience of P/W often includes the lifting of hands, dance, or of even
prostrating oneself. The risk of embarrassment
by engaging the body is symbolic of the emotional engagement of the worshipper
in the song. When the worshipper is
engaged emotionally in the song, repetition is a help rather than a
hindrance. But if the worshipper is
unengaged emotionally, the repetition is like nails on a chalkboard. (BTW, repetition in worship is biblically
endorsed. Check out Psalm 136 or the
practice of the four living beings in Revelation 4:8 who do not cease to cry, “Holy, holy, holy…) I strongly suspect that
those who do not like P/W and are averse to the repetition have never really
released themselves into a song. They
sing P/W songs just like they sing hymns and are generally disappointed.
There
is, of course, a great danger to emotional worship. Like Eros
in C.S. Lewis’ Four Loves, emotion “needs
to be ruled.” We worship in spirit and
truth. P/W songwriters have an
obligation to be true to Scripture in their lyrics. While problems remain, I have observed much
greater depth and richness in P/W texts in the last ten years. Worship leaders, too, have an obligation to
avoid emotional manipulation. With worshippers
released into emotional engagement, it would be very easy to turn up the heat
with musical effects that are intrinsically known to musicians. Worship leaders must be mature and
discerning.
Nevertheless,
I believe P/W is a great gift given to the church in the last 40 years. As a worship pastor, I have tried to
introduce the songs and the experience to the congregations that I have served
for over thirty years. In the same way,
I have also held up the richness and necessity of our hymn tradition in the
same churches. It hasn’t been easy. I am very passionate about having the church
experience the fullest spectrum of worship that they can. Not surprisingly, people are reluctant to
grow beyond their own comfort zone and experience. Hymn lovers have constantly harangued me
about repetition and the loudness of the band – even when I’ve measured the
decibel levels equal to or less than piano and organ. Contemporary P/W aficionados suggest that I’m
over-the-hill and irrelevant if I don’t constantly give them the playlist from
KLOVE.
This
has been my calling – my vocation for the last 30 years – to broaden the
experience and understanding of worship in the congregations that I have served. Frankly, the wounds I’ve suffered from people
who are unwilling to grow run deep in my soul.
I am war-weary. That is why I do
not find these jokes to be funny. For
the person who does not like P/W, it expresses their ignorance of and lack of
true experience in the genre through condescension. It isn’t funny. It’s divisive. Still, the jokes get a lot of laughs and
traction with a certain set. Though I
carry battle scars, my calling remains the same. I want the church to grow and embrace the
fullest and richest worship experience they can. I will, from now on, push back whenever I
encounter these condescending jokes.
No
apologies.
Comments
Post a Comment