Responses to "Praise Choruses"

Many years ago, I heard the great and inimitable Don Hustad give a lecture on evangelical hymnody. He outlined the history of the Gospel Song, as a descendant of the songs produced by the Sunday School Movement over 100 years ago. This is very familiar material, but Hustad gave us a new twist, a connection. Why did the Gospel Song flourish a generation after the Sunday School Song? A generation of children had grown up with these songs which were musically naive; used repetitious choruses; and were more experiential and more sentimental, and less theological than the hymns used by the older folks. When these children reached adulthood, they naturally wanted to use materials similar to what they had grown up with. So the Gospel Song [forming the bread-and-butter of evangelical hymnody for much of the 20^th century] grew into favor.

This is exactly what Prof. Drury is describing. The non-intellectual, happy-clappy choruses he mentions, used in the '50s, would naturally evolve into non-intellectual, happy-clappy praise choruses a generation later. Of course, the best of the Sunday School Songs and of the Gospel Songs have endured (think "He Leadeth Me" and "Blessed Assurance"), and the best of the Praise Choruses will no doubt also endure. But to me, the most telling lesson in all of this is the absolute necessity of exercising great care when selecting materials for teaching our children! What goes around, comes around.

>Do shallow praise choruses bug you? Sure do. Sure do. Sure do. Sure am. And I enjoyed the little poke at some of the golden oldies. Just one problem. To the best of my recollection of my experiences back then (and it could be fuzzy because it was a long time ago), none of the tunes cited were ever used in worship. They were used in Sunday School classes, Junior Church, and youth meetings. And the problem is that the new choruses have all the ability to get a hold of my mind and intellect of that level of class. If we're going to use these choruses in worship, why can't we have the flannel graph stories that so logically and appropriately go with them? --Tom Lindholtz

Your article didn't address the issues you raised. YOU GAVE NO ANSWERS to the questions you raised in the first paragraph. You only stated that some one at some time used songs that were no more substantial than some of today's songs. That only says that some people may be hypocrites. I understand that you were trying to state your point in a clever way, but it was clever and in no way substantial. This article sounded more like a mocking adolescent than a reasoned thinker. The issue is not music. The issue is what Christianity is. Is the Christian life about a feel good social event on Sunday or about helping other Christians live faithful, holy, and Godly lives in an ungodly world. Until the discussion goes beyond likes and dislikes to WHY we do things in church, we are merely bludgeoning each other with religious emotionalism to get our own (selfish) way. --Andrew Chapman

I don't know who you are but I would like to respond to your comments about the praise choruses. My concern is that our young folks won't have a Christian heritage of good old hymns of the faith written by godly saints inspired by and of God. And, as I remember, the choruses you mentioned were not sung in worship services - at least not in ours. They were sung in Vacation Bible School, Sunday School & camps & mission meetings, etc.

In my opinion, our young folks need to learn songs such as Come, Christian Join to Sing, Oh, for a Thousand Tongues, What a Friend, The Old Rugges Cross, I Love to Tell the Story and on and on and on and on. The ones (young folks) I see don't have a clue how to worship because it is so shallow. Someone very wisely said, "Music should minister to the heart and not the feet."

No, I don't like all the things the "Praise Bands" do. It's almost as if "If you can't win them with the Word, then we'll try to win them with the world." That's exactly what it sounds like sometimes. And yes, it does happen in my own church, much to my sadness. I don't attend when I know that's what it is going to be like and it's almost entirely on Sunday evening. I'm so thankful that there is no where in the Scripture that says we "must" go to church on Sunday evening, although I do miss the wonderful services we used to have on Sunday evening.

I can say that some of the choruses are very good and can lead you into the very presence of God; however, they are the exception - not the norm.

'nuff said. Thanks for listening (or reading).

I have made the same statements you do in the article about the choruses of days gone by compared to the worship music of today. But don't you have to admit that all your chorus examples from the 50's are children's choruses? I don't recall ever hearing one of them being used as a primary part of a worship service...sung during the old fashioned Sunday School opening yes, during a church service, no. So far as repetition, the complaints I have heard are more about the worship chorus being sung over and over in a service than that the words repeat themselves within the chorus. Even great a great hymn like "How Firm a Foundation" would get tiresome if at the end of the 6th verse the worship leader wanted to go back to the beginning for another 6 verses. A great worship chorus might be worth a repeat, maybe even two, but it is unfair to think people are unspiritual because they aren't especially enthusiastic about singing the same praise chorus for ten minutes.

I agree that much of the music today is an improvement over the children's choruses of the 1950's...but again, they weren't written to be sung 5 or 6 times as a featured part of worship in a Sunday morning service either. --Scott

Obviously there is now and has always been a scale of gradation regarding the quality of sacred music, like all other forms of music, and like the depth of our worship. One recent morning I composed an e-mail to my regular addressees that explained how, while driving a borrowed car that had no CD player, I'd been forced to listen to the local "Contemporary Christian" radio station on my way to work. I noted that much of the "Praise and Worship" that they play is just noise to my Southern Gospel-tuned ears. One song's lyrics caught my attention that morning: "He is not silent. He is not whispering. We are not quiet. We are not listening."I suspect the reason that so many of us hear no depth in so much of today's worship music is that we are not quiet, we are not listening. We are so satisfied with (and accustomed to) our familiar concept of worship that something outside the norm requires a refocusing of our mental and spiritual concentration. Don't all of us long for things to be like they were in the "good old days?" I know I'm guilty.

Hi, Keith. It's interesting to me that where people complain about shallow choruses, they also complain about shallow preaching, whereas in churches where the preaching is perceived to have weight and depth, people tend to think the choruses "usher them into the presence." Perhaps many pastors are expecting the choruses to feed the flock rather than to call them to the table. Also, those who prefer the 50's style are older, presumably more mature in knowledge, if not in obedience, and thus would tend to have a greater need for "depth" to stimulate their minds. I observe that depth isn't necessary to stimulate the conscience or the will, but is necessary to stimulate the intellect. Perhaps older Christians sometimes stumble into the snare of "knowledge without obedience" which was your major theme some years ago. Obviously young Christians can also do this, but it seems especially to happen to veterans. --Jon

I will make this short and to the point. I thinks sometimes God says, "Will you just worship Me!" I don't think he cares if you use Choruses or Hymns. I don't think He prefers one over the other - "Will you just worship Me" The big thing that I want is simply give me Jesus. You can do your stuff up in front, - Special Music, Choir, Drama, Prayer, Choruses, Hymns, etc... After you do all that give me Jesus! Worship isn't singing a song - It's letting yourself be broken before God. Choruses and Hymns are good and we need to do that but are we being broken and humble before God. I think the biggest sin that happens on Sunday Mornings is taking God's name in vain. Vain means: Without value; empty; worthless; ineffectual; light minded; conceited. ---- IN VAIN: TO NO PURPOSE. Many times on Sunday morning we have people (In Shame: Myself at times) who set in our pews in vain repetition sing songs, do responsive readings, and hear a message. They go home and not changed. Why? We are not letting ourselves be broken before the Lord. "He must become greater, I must become less" John 3:30 --Brad Harris

I am among the crowd of those that see the lack of theological content or the missing Christ-centeredness of so many current choruses. I wonder if I was given a dollar for every time that I meant what I sang in some of these songs how rich I would be. I don't think that the issue is more of do I mean what I am singing, or will I do what I am singing about, as much of the actuality of what am I singing this for? I often think of some of the worship songs that we sing to be doorways of nice fuzzy fantasies that take us on a ride in our minds of what we dream of being instead of actually becoming. Do I like doing this? You better believe it! I like to know what I want to become before I actually become it first at times. My question is, "Do I get so infatuated with what I want to become through listening to the songs that I dream along with that I totally skip reality and check out into the fantasy land for the warm, feel good fuzzies? Are these songs just helping me in the process of self-actualization (Maslow) or am I worshipping God in the process?

I have no doubt that "Better is one day in his house than thousands elsewhere", or the fact that "I want to know you more", or even that I want you to "Open the eyes of my heart Lord". What I am worried about is the emotional attraction of checking out to 'fantasy land' so that I can feel good and 'feel' that I worshipped the Lord in song, when in reality I have gotten an emotional stir on the happy side have not even thought about what I have said. A project that I would like to do in the next 50 years is to create a notebook of praise choruses (and hymns for that matter) and theologically tear them apart to see the validity in them. I am convinced that Charles Wesley and Isaac Watts thought through the theology of their songs a little more than the contemporary composers before they had them published to sing.

As far as starting a new club...probably not a good idea. Looks like we are just going to have to use what we have given to us or leave. Can God still work when songs sang to Him are not theologically sound? Yes! Can He still work when we offer up to Him a prayer of bad theological taste? Yes! I prefer the contemporary music over hymns when it comes to me worshipping. However, I do analyze every word that I sing. I do not allow my theology to be spoon fed to me (Philippians 2:12-13), but I will allow God to work in me through my thoughts of what I want to become by striving to do so and by worshipping Him in the process.

I'm much more concerned with shallow accountability, teaching and Lord's Supper worship than I am in shallow singing. Let's face it -- as a worship component corporate singing has always and will always be amongst the shallow waters in the sea of the church. One could use many of the anti-Iconoclastic historical arguments for usage of singing today. It's a way to bring the lofty ideas of God down to the common and understandable level in many ways. The masses need an entry point. So sing whatever you like... every movement of God seems to thrive in these shallow waters (from adding lyrics to bar tunes to singing U2 songs for offering)... but every lasting movement of God had leaders that treaded water in the deep, and taught people to swim out into the sea of complexity that is our faith. -- Dave Drury

From: "Jeffrey S. Sykes" <jsykes@nts.edu>

Jesus on the inside

working on the outside

oh what a change he has made!

woo hoo

pardon me while I go hurl

--JS

"Climb, Climb up Sunshine Mountain; faces all aglow." ... "Oh Stop and let me tell you." ... "I've got a mansion, just over the hilltop." ... Wow, Keith, you remember all those?!? <laughing> So do I. <sober, now> --Tim

Your point is well taken, but not quite. I am in agreement that the choruses we were singing in the "fifties" especially when you compare them to many of the choruses we sing today, were considerably short on substance if not downright silly. However, this is to miss the point entirely. Most of those choruses we were singing in the fifties were not written initially for adults in the first place and certainly were never intended to be an integral part of the Sunday morning worship service. They were written for children and teenagers for use in youth ministries. It is true, the use of those choruses splashed over into our worship services on occasion, but never to the degree we use choruses today. The use of choruses "as an integral part of the worship service" is a more recent innovation that evolved primarily through the Charismatic movement and spilled over into the broader evangelical community where it became entrenched as a common feature of evangelical worship by the late nineteen-eighties. What is really behind the frustration, if not resentment, that has begun to gain momentum regarding the use of choruses today especially as they are so closely linked to worship? While the theological content of many of these choruses (not all) is seriously lacking, thus offering an intellectually safe ground for one to stand while casting a stone, I contend that this is not the real issue. Congregational singing in the churches of which I was acquainted when growing up was something of a spontaneous exercise that flowed most often from a Spirit -endowed enthusiasm within the worshipping community, and in somewhat of a mystical way was associated with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. A song leader could plan a song service but you could not, nor indeed did you attempt, to orchestrate spontaneity, spiritual enthusiasm or inspiration. These we innately understood to be within the mystical aura of the work of the Holy Spirit.Today it seems that many "worship leaders" have a different understanding of all this and are attempting to do not only their job, but the Spirit's as well. Since worship involves our emotions (spontaneity, enthusiasm, inspiration) it must be the job of the worship leader to see to it that these things are in evidence. How does he accomplish this? Well one way is to insist that we sing the same little chorus 6 or 7 times. If that doesn't make you emotional, then we will stand and sing it another 4! The congregation is held hostage by the worship leader until he can extract from us what he feels he must in order to do his job right. This kind of orchestration of emotions always come off sounding and feeling counterfeit. It is neither enjoyable for many of us, nor worshipful! --J. W. Watkins, Vancouver, WA

No, we probably need to return to the songs of the 1910s or 1920s. That way we would be really spiritual, like our grandmothers. Like your site. I'm a Methodist pastor in Virginia. Blessings, --clay, Rev. W. Clay Knick.

Are you serious?

--- Mark Mason, Vienna, WVa