Rejection By Silent Majority – The Fate of Many Modern Worship Songs

Wow, Stackhouse is harsh. It seems like he’s just pounding on Tomlin because he’s “too” popular right now, rather than considering whether his music is achieving what it sets out to achieve; to direct our praise toward God. The Bible has gotten a lot of criticism from our universities for it’s grammatical and structural “issues.” Is John going to launch an attack on it, because it is the #1 all time best seller? OK, maybe that’s unfair. My point is, though; whether I like Chris Tomlin’s music or not (can’t stand his voice), it does what it is intended to do. 99% of the people have never even noticed that Chris’ lyrics don’t always perfectly rhyme, or that the music is too simplistic. They don’t care…I don’t care. In the end, I believe God smiles down on his flock when we stand united together in awe and worship of Him, rhyming or not, perfect pitch or not, organs or not, drums or not, all of the crap that we bother debating in the Christian community or not. God wants our praise. Simple as that!

This reminds me of a statement I heard last week from a well known Christian psychologist and author. He said (paraphrased), “Christianity has done more harm for the cause of the gospel than any other thing in history.” In my opinion, petty bickering over whether our music doesn’t rhyme perfectly only serves to divide and harm our relationships with each other. If our relationships with each other are being harmed, our relationship with God is being hindered. If our relationship with God is being hindered, our praise, honor and service to him are being impacted.

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Michael Krahn, WorshipRises. WorshipRises said: RT @michaelkrahn: Rejection By Silent Majority – The Fate of Many Modern Worship Songs – http://bit.ly/aZRJWL #WorshipRises [...]

I love that silent majority bit. I think that’s the final test for whether or not a song should be added to the church playlist.

This is so true. All of the songs that the church loves to *sing* are ones that are just that, ones they love to sing. The big hymns, the CCLI top 100; they’re all singable songs.

I do think it’s interesting from the flip side of things as well: most people fault a lot of “contemporary” songs for being un-singable but I cringe when we start to sing “Living for Jesus” in the original key. “This is (screech) the pathway….”

Many people who do traditional music might think sometimes, well “It’s in the hymnal, it must be a good congregational song!” Good thoughts, Michael.

Here is my guidelines for picking songs to sing

1. Are the words Biblical?
2. Can we sing this as a congregation? (If I can listen to it a couple of times and get it, most people can)
3. Can the musicians play it with excellence?
4. Wonderful freedom for singing :–)

Wait, wait, wait. Let’s all hold on just a second.

I’ll grant you one major point from this post: singability is crucial. A lot of songs don’t work because they aren’t congregationally singable. Yes, that’s right.

But we’re in trouble when we say, “I do know this: more often than not, if I do a Chris Tomlin song with our church they are singing their hearts out for the glory of God. As a worship leader, what more could I ask for? Why do I care whether the last word of each line rhymes? Why do I care whether the melody is simple or not?”

Why are we in trouble there? Because the final test of the song is totally pragmatic.

Let’s apply the same logic to the many terrible Baptist-y hymns that were popular a generation or two ago. I’m thinking of songs like “In the Garden”, most of the stuff by the Gaithers, and many of Fanny Crosby’s songs. So many such songs are more sentimental than theological, which is not always bad, but often is.

Here’s the thing: they’re totally singable, and many of the people in my own church love them (while I cringe through them every Sunday). In this case, it is easy for me to see the shortcomings of the songs because I’m generationally removed from them. I read these songs as we sing and go, “How in the world did anyone everyone connect to this garbage? There is almost nothing deep to sink my teeth into.”

Or what about the overly simplistic but incredibly singable first generation of praise songs (e.g. “We Want to See Jesus Lifted High”, “He Has Made Me Glad”, “Shine Jesus Shine” and “Hosanna”)? Should we stick with them because “people sing their hearts out” to them?

I’d suggest not. I’d suggest that what we see there is the influence of capitalism’s preference for the least common denominator on Christian worship. What I mean by that is this: pop music in a capitalistic society will always be what appeals to the broadest number of people for the obvious reason that it can sell the most. Christian publishers (like those who publish Tomlin, among others) are a part of this system, with all its advantages and disadvantages. It isn’t all bad, of course. But it does play into what everyday people are already subjected to: don’t stretch yourself artistically in any way- we’ll bring the music down to your level.

Again, by no means is this all bad, but aren’t we afraid that sacrificing artistic integrity for the sake of singability will make us lose something in the way of our depth? Isn’t there a real way in which the standards for praise-singing center on how pragmatism and entertainment?

If that’s what it comes down to, then I’m afraid we’re preaching the eulogy at the funeral of great Christian praise songs.

Andrew Faris
Christians in Context

Singability is hugely important. As Andrew Faris says, it’s not everything. One more thing to consider: Hardly any song will connect emotionally with everyone in a diverse congregation. Though there are one or two Chris Tomlin songs I like, for the most part, his songs don’t connect with me. It’s probably because I’m old. When we sing his songs at church, I exercise patience, realizing that they speak to others. I’d urge worship leaders to gently broaden the number of styles of music that their congregation will sing–making sure that the words are theologically sound and preferably theologically deep. Doing so shows respect for those who respond to those other kinds of music.

I’d have to agree with you, Michael, about the approach Dr. Stackhouse took – pretty brutal. And I definitely agree with you on the singability issue. I sing in our worship group, and I see exactly what you describe when a “song” that is really a series of musical phrases with little to no connection between them or resolution is played. I see it especially with anyone in the congregation over about thirty years old; everyone younger has been growing up with less and less formal musical education about musical phrasing, and more “education” via radio and iTunes. The only person I’ve heard really helpfully adress this issue is Bob Kauflin of SGM.

But I do also agree with Andrew. If singability is perhaps a factor of melodic laziness, then lyrics that are ambiguous or grammatically inconsistent are a factor of laziness too. A lot of the songs you’re describing may express some truthful things about God, but they’re ambiguous – different people are thinking different things when they’re singing them. But if they’re singable, we give them a pass.

IMHO, the best hymns/spiritual songs are didactic, not just expressive. They teach gospel truth with the lyrics, and they reinforce what they teach by using tight melodies and literary devices like rhyming or progression of thought. The Gettys are great examples of this. I don’t think Tomlin is.

One last thing – I’m trying to come up with a better word than “laziness” to describe the singability and ambiguity issues. I certainly don’t at all mean to imply that Tomlin et al are being sinfully slothful or anything like that. Undisciplined perhaps? Immature?

Thanks for the comment Andrew. This has been a fun discussion that’s made its way around pretty quickly.

“Why are we in trouble there? Because the final test of the song is totally pragmatic.”

I’m going to disagree with this point, mostly. The quote that you pulled from my post says that the final test is not the singability of the song but the hearts of the people. If the song is singable AND the hearts of the people who are singing are stirred for the glory of God, I’m sold. Just singable but no response from the congregation in a supernatural sense? I’m out.

Semantics, maybe, but I wanted to clear that up just in case.

PS Let me add that neither the post on my blog nor the quotes pulled here on Michael’s outline my full theology of congregational worship. I hope we can all agree on that.

Rachael Starke – While I love much of the music by the Gettys, I’ll come to the defense of Chris Tomlin concerning some of what you said. His music is very well-suited to both the musical tastes and the theological depth of many people. Some of his music has a significant amount of theology; some of it doesn’t. I grew up with some classic hymns. That’s probably a major factor in why I love the Getty music while most of Tomlin’s doesn’t do much for me. On the other hand, for people who grew up with an almost exclusive diet of rock music or who are newer converts or both, Tomlin’s music is probably superior. The Lord has used him. I’m thankful that my church’s pastor of music and worship (who’s actually named Michael Jackson) includes both types.

[...] But recently there’s been more visible unrest within the modern worship community itself.   Michael Krahn comments,  in a blog post inspired by one by Canadian Chris [...]

[...] Rejection By The Silent Majority The problem with most worship songs written today is NOT simplicity, it’s singability. Writing a good, singable song requires both artistry and servanthood. These qualities are difficult to balance, and unfortunately many of today’s worship writers are not doing a very good job of it.  Unique melodies and song structures are fun to listen to but when a congregation is subjected to it, more often than not the song is rejected by silent majority. [...]

[...] Read the whole thing here.  [...]

This is a fantastic comment Jim, if for nothing else than it shows that rare and wonderful humility that says, “Not every part of every service has to connect to me in every way.”

Worship leaders everywhere are thankful for folks like you.

I don’t think it was at all right to refer to Stackhouse’s post as “disgraceful”.

That’s being much too kind.