Posted on 12/01/2004 7:48:32 AM PST by sionnsar
[Please read the comment following, to get the context of this posting, before starting into this article. --sionnsar]
The Catholic church has been fighting a running battle with narcissism in worship ever since apostolic times. There has never been a shortage of people who want to take over public worship for their own purposes. In this battle–really a tug-of-war–two powerful forces struggle for supremacy. On the one side there is “me”: the personal dimension of religion. The faith of Christianity must involve the personal, private relationship of the individual ("me") to the personal Jesus, who will always listen to every prayer. On the other side of this tug-of-war is the job of faith. Christians come together to worship as a community. The Mass is a public, communal effort, in which individuals act and pray as a group. Tension between the private and public sectors is inevitable.
We can see this tension in two thousand years of Christian art for a liturgical setting. The painters of the Byzantine icon, for example, were ready to burst with emotional religious fervor and yet at every stage of artistic creation they pulled this zeal back; they held the reins tightly, as it were. They would not permit themselves the luxury of painting their own version of what they felt. Instead, they submitted to a canon of taste that belonged to something larger than themselves: the highest expectations of the community, the culture, or, if you wish, the tribe. The painters of the icon put their private, inner faith into the painted image but they did so according to strict conventions and traditional formulas; in this way they communicated to the beholder the message that the image went beyond the mere feelings of the artist and beyond the commonplace.
The church insisted on obedience to a great Unwritten Law which went something like this: “As a creative artist you may follow your own instincts but your art or music for the church must not clash with the liturgical function; it must take its place in the objective liturgical setting and not seem like an intrusion. Your creation must display a degree of quality and craftsmanship which will be agreeable to prince and peasant, male and female, young and old. Everyone who sees the artwork or hears the music must sense a group endeavor, a group prayer: maybe something performed by the assembly or by a choir acting in the name of the assembly, maybe a painting that seems to sum up the highest religious aspirations of a whole people. In the past the icon painters prayed and fasted as they struggled to put the holy images into the exacting forms prescribed by tradition. You must try to do something similar.”
The composers of … reformed folk music have created a large repertory of songs with mild harmonies, comforting words, and a sort of “easy listening” sound; it is all so very undisturbed and appealing, the musical equivalent of the warm bubblebath. The whole enterprise has been resoundingly successful and some publications sell in the millions…. For the time being, the reformed-folk repertory (also known as “contemporary” church music) occupies the high ground; it has the advantage of appearing to possess a musical and a moral superiority. It enjoys the reputation for being “new” and “what the people want.”
The victory of the folk style, reformed or otherwise, is so great and so blinding that many people cannot see beyond the apparent success to what could mildly be called the problem with this music: simply put, nearly all of it–no matter how sincere, no matter how many scriptural texts it contains–oozes with an indecent narcissism. The folk style, as it has developed since the 1960s, is Ego Renewal put to music.
“I” and “me” songs or sung versions of intense personal “conversations” with God can be found in the psalms and in almost two millennia of Christian worship, but great care was taken to make sure that the music would not sound like a presentation of individual “I-me” emotions. The words of the psalm might say “I” and “me,” but the music, intended for public worship, said “we.” A good example of this can be seen in the various settings of Psalm 90/91, a song of comfort and a reminder of God’s abiding protection. In the Middle Ages, the words of this psalm were lifted out of the common place and uttered in the Latin language (Qui habitat in adjutorio Altissimi …); the sentiments in the text were then twisted in the unusually shaped melodies of chant, the musical equivalent of the icon. These two “artificial” steps (the Latin language and the odd melodies) reminded everyone that this particular text, as sun, was not the personal property of the singer but an integral part of a public act of worship.
The early Protestant reformers translated the same psalm into the vernacular so that the congregation could sing it, but they too kept this important element of distance and “artificiality”; that is, they preserved the ideal of the “icon in music.” The words of the psalm were jammed into the pattern of a strict poetic meter with rhyme. ("O God, our help in ages past,/Our hope for years to come …") Melodies were foursquare and totally without a sense of private intimacy. Sometimes the melodies were so “neutral” and generic that a tune could be used for any kind of psalm: one with a joyous text or one with more mournful words.
Now, with the above versions of Psalm 90/91 in mind, analyze the same text as found in the song On Eagle’s Wings by Michael Joncas. Note the enormous difference. The Joncas work, an example of the reformed-folk style at its most gushing, does not proclaim the psalm publicly; it embraces the text–lovingly, warmly, and even romantically. That moaning and self-caressing quality of the music, so common in the reformed-folk style, indicates that the real topic of the words is not the comforting Lord but “me” and the comforts of my personal faith.
One composer of “contemporary” church music described perfectly what is going on in this type of music. He said that in his own compositions he tried to bring out the “felt meanings” of the sung words. There is indeed something quite tactile about the way this music manipulates the words; the meaning of the text has to be molded, shaped–felt. As a result, the performance of reformed-folk music depends heavily on a dramatic realism, on the ability of soloists to communicate personal feelings, felt meanings, to a congregation.
The music of the St. Louis Jesuits, the Dameans, the Weston Monks, Michael Joncas, and all the others is, without any doubt, a revolutionary addition to the Roman Rite. These composers have, as it were, smashed the icon, an exceedingly revolutionary act.
Well, leaving for music sounds so shallow, doesn't it? But if I don't think the service is actually worshipful, I don't know what else to do. When you complain about the music, you are told that the new music is what pepople want. I don't think so.
I just thought of a great example: the difference between the music at the Inaugural (Mrs. Lott's choices) and the Inaugural prayer service (chosen by Mrs. Bush). I can't tell you how many people complained about a couple of those songs on the Inaugural thread. That is how I feel in worship services any more.
Our problem, I think, is similar to what we see in the rest of American culture. We are in a "feel good" society, and it has insidiously seeped into our churches.
The people in charge are '60's baby boomers who don't want to think too hard, and never want to use their minds in worship......only feelings.......thus the 'dumbing down' of our churches.
Your parallel between the National Prayer Service music selected by Laura, and the Inaugural pop style is apt, IMO. There aren't many worship services left that have the depth of the music that Laura selected, and that is a severe loss.
What's most problematic to me, though, is that children are growing up completely ignorant of hymnology, and theological depth, and their faith is weakened as a result. It's all part of a complex problem in the contemporary church, but music is a large part of it.
However, because I had a great public school music teacher, I learned lots of hymns, which were in my music book. I still can see the illustrations for Fairest Lord Jesus, Come Ye Thankful People Come, and O Little Town of Bethlemhem. Sadly, many children in churches do not know these hymns.
In another generation, if something doesn't change, these hymns will be as lost as the folk songs of France.
IOTN: While those words invoke a sense of comfort, it's not to be confused with irreverence or casual laziness.
-----
I don't know if you are aware of the fierce thread about dressing for church and reverence to God or not.
I'd been troubled by a local church policy on the subject--that platform people MUST wear ties and jackets etc. and a general haughty stuffiness that semed to go with it. After the thread, I was even more convinced than ever.
History is clear.
There was NO dressing for church until after the industrial revolution.
People only had a very hole-y, ragged set of clothes to do farm work in and a somewhat less hole-y and ragged set to go to town in.
For a long time after the Industrial Revolution, churches FORBADE folks from dressing up for schurch to avoid the pride, ostentaciousness, haughtiness and their less well-to-do bretheren feeling LESS THAN.
Eventually, as it often does, pride won out and we have the horrid flaunting stuff that goes on to this day. Where sects forbade buttons, then the elegance of the 'frog-ties' became an issue etc.
I'm convinced it's far better to trash all that--better for one's spirit and relationship with God.
I've become more convinced than ever that
REVERENCE IS AN ATTITUDE OF THE HEART.
That finery does not aid it one microgram's worth. Nor does ragged casualness degrade it one microgram's worth.
There will be times when a white robe is required. God will provide it.
There may be special event times when SOME folks would think that finery was quite in order. If so, I think the Biblical standard is clear. If one has two coats, give one to the brother without one.
IF A CONGREGATION IS NOT WILLING TO INSURE THAT EVERY MEMBER, ATTENDER AND VISITOR HAS EQUALLY FINE CLOTHES TO WEAR--AT NO CHARGE TO THE POORER AMONGST THEM--THEN THAT CONGREGATION HAS NO BUSINESS SETTING A STANDARD OF DRESSING FOR CHURCH.
I've only been in one church like that.
But even then, I think the temptation to construe fine clothes as a component of righteousness would be overwhelming and deceptive.
This whole business of looking down one's MORE RIGHTEOUS NOSE BECAUSE I'M DRESSED RIGHT vs looking on the heart--is unBiblical, haughty, deceptive, insideous, and an insult to the covering of Christ's Blood over all us Blood-brothers before The Cross, imho.
WHOMSOEVER WILL, SHALL COME.
Only the rabble made it. The fine dressed wouldn't come. The Banquet Host was furious--go out into the highways and byways and compel them--only the rabble made it. And The Host took care of the clothes.
I somewhat suspect that it's a LITTLE bit like eating meat. Whatever you do--do it for the glory of God--whether dressing up to honor God or dressing down to insure the brother feels equal, at HOME and Loved by God and man.
Certainly the psychological research is very clear. EXTRINSIC RELIGIOSITY correlates extremely highly with phoney, shallow, hypocritical--even harsh and viscious spirituality.
-------
On the issue of
ABBA FATHER--DADDY . . .
Have also thought long and hard on this topic.
I no longer think it is even possible
TO PROPERLY, FITTINGLY REVERENCE GOD AS HE DESIRES
without
being able to authentically sincerely call Him Daddy from the heart, being firmly convinced in the mind that it is a reality, as well.
I suppose that it is better for our tail-feathers if we are terrified of Almighty God vs dismissive of Him. And, that He would prefer the former to the latter.
But that is NOT the sort of Relationship Christ died for. And any less relationship is an insult to Christ's death and Blood.
There is something in the heart of man addicted to RELIGION and EXTERNAL REVERENCE is one of it's midwives. And Christ was most hostile against it.
I'll take 100,000 rabble in torn and dirty jeans of sincere heart reverence any day over 10 tsk tsking about their clothes.
DADDY is the nature of the relationship THE ALMIGHTY WANTS.
Only when we have found Him authentically and reliably DADDY can we enter into with heartfelt intensity--into the proper heart reverence for DADDY AS ALMIGHTY GOD.
Until then, we are terrified slaves but not sons.
Thanks for sharing your testimony!
>>REVERENCE IS AN ATTITUDE OF THE HEART.<<
Absolutely. And since all things external originate within the heart, what does that say about someone who approaches worship of the Lord in a casual and irreverent manner?
I'm not harping on clothing. I've worn jeans to church before - it's not a "federal case". You have to look at the total package. Someone who dresses casually (in and of itself) but worships reverently is a-ok. The case that I referenced included a woman who not only dressed irreverently, but behaved irreverently (by drinking a soda during the service). It was clear that her heart, mind, and sould were not focused on the Lord.
I sincerely hope you're not putting "words in my mouth" (or thoughs on my post, as it were) by insinuating that I look down upon others due to how they dress. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Youth Ministry services that I lead are most assuredly "dress-down". However - there are behavior standards that are in place. No coarse joking, offensive language, etc. There's a time for worship, and there's a time for Mountain Dew drinking.
I love the Lord my God, Quix. I love Him with the entirety of my miserable meart. I also respect Him. I also fear Him. I tremble at His mighty judgment. I also hold His Sovereignty and Providence in the highest levels of admiration and awe. His rod of correction, as well as His staff of protection, comfort me.
It's all of those things at once - not a progression from one to the next, eventually arriving at some point.
Well said.
Certainly did not want to put words in your fingers.
I was springboarding off your post and responding somewhat, still, to that ancient thread. Sorry.
LOL.
Oh my goodness.....we really WERE separated at birth, OWF. While I'm not a former church musician, we even share Reformed tradition roots!
Thanks much. Will check it out and likely buy some of the songs to download.
I think your right. I'd be interested in some of those references.
whoops, got em! Thanks for posting them.
Only now in a church that has the goal of worshiping God, through Christ, and isn't playing the numbers game and using music as a hook.
It's a rare breed these days.
Son in Colorado has found a Reformed Presby church he really loves.
(I tell you, if it weren't for that dog/cat difference, we'd be identical twins. ;o)
Oh, you're welcome. By the time I found out you were looking for them, you had found them. :o)
Glad you are better, and back at the music!
Thank you for this ping too.
JM
(Who just spent 4 hours listening to praise CDs while driving.)
"...Satan is using music to tear churches apart..."
You are absolutely correct.
I tend to be a touch cynical about it because I have so many colleagues who have lost long time music positions through false accusations and deceit, as I did (rather than honestly being told 'We want someone different in this job who will make us more popular'), and it makes me seriously wonder who is leading this movement in our churches.
IMO, there is something sinister at work here, because if God were really in this, people's lives wouldn't be being destroyed because of it.
To tell you the truth, annie....I would never work in 90% of today's churches because I actually believe the music ministry is to allow Christians to worship (with heart and soul and MIND) and not to draw a crowd or give people warm fuzzies with no meaning, and that's not the trend in today's churches.
I praise the Lord that we found a rare church with the depth to want true Biblical worship, and not popularity.
Count me as one.
We are silent because we are trying to be Christ-like about it.
Perhaps it's time to stand up and be counted about this sin that is going on all over the country in churches of every denomination.......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.